ICE Announces Standardized 287(g) Agreements with 67 State and Local Law Enforcement Partners

By: Allen E. Kaye

Assistant Secretary for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) John Morton today announced standardized Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) with 67 state and local law enforcement agencies to participate in 287(g) partnerships—improving public safety by prioritizing criminal aliens who are a threat to local communities, ensuring consistent and uniform policies and providing a force multiplier for ICE’s immigration enforcement efforts across the country.

“Coordinating with our state and local partners is important to smart and effective enforcement of our immigration laws,” said Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. “These new agreements promote public safety by prioritizing the identification and removal of dangerous criminal aliens and ensure consistency and stronger federal oversight of state and local immigration law enforcement efforts across the nation. The rules set forth in these agreements will enhance our efforts to work together effectively with our local partners.”  “These new partnerships are an essential tool for law enforcement to identify and remove dangerous criminal aliens from local communities,” said Assistant Secretary Morton. “Standardizing these agreements allows us to better use the resources and capabilities of our law enforcement partners, facilitates accountability and ensures that all participating jurisdictions are following uniform standards throughout the country.”

The state and local law enforcement partnerships announced today conform to the standardized 287(g) MOA announced by Secretary Janet Napolitano and Assistant Secretary Morton in July—
strengthening ICE’s overall immigration enforcement strategy by aligning local operations with ICE’s major priorities, specifically the identification and removal of criminal aliens.

The 287(g) program acts as a force multiplier, training officers from local jurisdictions to carry out smart, effective immigration enforcement efforts aligned with ICE priorities. Throughout the country, 1,075 local officers have been trained through 287(g)—bolstering national immigration enforcement efforts and saving hundreds of millions of dollars.

From January 2009 to date, 287(g)-trained local officers are credited with the removal of approximately 24,000 aliens nationwide and have identified 48 percent more criminal aliens than during the same period in 2008.

The new partnerships include the Jail Model, in which local law enforcement agencies designate Jail Enforcement Officers to identify aliens already incarcerated within their detention facilities who are eligible for removal, as well as the Federal Task Force Model, in which agencies designate officers to work with Federal agents in locating, processing and removing criminal aliens from the United States.

The agreements announced today fall into four categories:
- 55 agreements have been signed by ICE and the partnering agency;
- 12 agreements have been reached and await approval by the local jurisdiction’s supervisory authority; and
- Six agreements have negotiations underway.
- Six jurisdictions did not re-sign the new 287(g) agreement or withdrew during negotiations for a variety of reasons, including implementation of the Secure Communities program, budgetary constraints and limited program utilization.

The new MOA clearly defines the objectives of the 287(g) program, outlines the immigration enforcement authorities granted by the agreement and provides guidelines for ICE’s supervision of local agency officer operations—including information reporting and tracking, complaint procedures, and implementation measures.

To address concerns that individuals may be arrested for minor offenses as a guise to initiate removal proceedings, the new agreement requires participating local law enforcement agencies to pursue all criminal charges that originally caused the offender to be taken into custody. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA) of 1996 added Section 287(g) to the Immigration and Nationality Act, which authorizes the DHS Secretary to enter into agreements with state and local law enforcement agencies to perform immigration officer functions. Pursuant to these agreements, designated officers who receive appropriate training and function under the supervision of sworn ICE officers are permitted to perform immigration law enforcement duties.

USCIS Reminds Applicants for Travel Documents to Apply Early

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reminds individuals that they must obtain Advance Parole – permission to reenter the United States after traveling abroad – from USCIS before traveling abroad if they have:

• been granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS);
• a pending application for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident (LPR);
• a pending application for relief under section 203 of the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA 203);
• a pending asylum application; or
• a pending application for legalization.

To obtain Advance Parole, individuals must file Form I-131, Application for Travel Document, which is available under “Forms” on USCIS’ Web site. 

Advance Parole is permission to reenter the United States after traveling abroad. Advance Parole is an extraordinary measure used sparingly to allow an otherwise inadmissible individual to enter the United States due to compelling circumstances. By law, certain individuals must apply for a travel document and have Advance Parole approved before leaving the United States. Attempts to reenter the United States without prior authorization may have severe consequences since individuals requiring advance parole may be unable to return to the United States and their pending applications may be denied or administratively closed.
Applicants planning to travel abroad should plan ahead since Advance Parole processing times take about 90 days, depending on the USCIS office location. Instructions for filing Form I-131 provide details on where to mail travel document applications and should be followed carefully to avoid delay. For more information on Advance Parole see How Do I Get a Travel Document? and instructions for Form I-131.

Note:
Under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, aliens who depart the United States after being unlawfully present in the United States for certain periods can be barred from admission to lawful permanent resident status, even if they have obtained Advance Parole. Aliens who have been unlawfully present in the United States for more than 180 days, but less than one year, are inadmissible for three years; those who have been unlawfully present for one year or more are inadmissible for 10 years. Aliens who are unlawfully present, then depart the United States and subsequently reenter under a grant of parole, may still be ineligible to adjust their status.

Individuals who have been admitted as refugees or granted asylum, including those who are applying for adjustment of status, do not need to obtain Advance Parole. Instead, these individuals should apply for a Refugee Travel Document using Form I-131 and comply with applicable application requirements, such as biometric processing, prior to leaving the United States.

Lawful permanent residents who obtained such status as a result of being a refugee or asylee in the United States may also apply for a Refugee Travel Document. For more information on Refugee Travel Documents please see How Do I Get a Refugee Travel Document?

Asylum applicants, asylees, refugees and lawful permanent residents who obtained such status based on their asylum or refugee status are subject to special rules with regard to traveling outside the United States. Such individuals are encouraged to review USCIS’ Fact Sheet Traveling Outside the United States as an Asylum Applicant, an Asylee, or a Lawful Permanent Resident Who Obtained Such Status Based on Asylum Status.

Before making any plans to travel abroad, all individuals with pending applications for adjustment of status, relief under NACARA 203, or asylum are urged to consult an immigration attorney or immigration assistance organization accredited by the Board of Immigration Appeals, or call the USCIS Customer Service Center at 1 (800) 375-5283.

AILA Military Assistance Program (MAP)

The AILA Military Assistance Program (MAP) is a new collaborative effort between the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and the Legal Assistance Offices (LAO) of the United States military Judge Advocate General Corps. The military Legal Assistance Offices (LAO) provide free assistance to soldiers and their families, including active duty, reserve component, and retired military personnel in order to maintain the highest level of readiness possible in the event a military member is deployed. Recently, however, JAG attorneys have been inundated with complex immigration legal questions. To resolve these cases successfully, they often need the assistance and experience of seasoned immigration attorneys. AILA MAP is bringing these two groups together for the first time in this dynamic partnership.

The Need: Complex immigration laws and a broken system are making it even more difficult for U.S. military personnel serving at home and overseas. Some are facing the reality that their spouses or other immediate family members may face serious immigration consequences in the absence of an advocate, including possible deportation. Because marrying a U.S. citizen does not mean the spouse is automatically entitled to U.S. citizenship or permanent legal status, many military families find themselves in precarious situations. If forced to choose between continuing their military careers and preserving their families, many military members have indicated that they would be forced to resign their posts. Our military personnel need and deserve the peace of mind that their loved ones will be waiting for them when they return, and we need their skill and talents to continue to keep this country safe. Your experience and expertise in providing this pro bono service is an invaluable way for you, too, to serve your country.

How You Can Help: Complete the AILA MAP volunteer application form and return to AILA at probono@aila.org. Your name will be added to a list of volunteer attorneys available to JAG officers who will contact you when they require assistance. This pro bono assistance could be just answering a question or it could be the opportunity to provide direct representation. Signing up now, however, does not mean you must accept a case if it is offered. Although AILA hopes all members will sign up to be part of this landmark partnership, we understand that your particular involvement is subject to your availability at the time you are contacted by a JAG officer.
For more information on AILA MAP or other pro bono opportunities, contact Susan Timmons at stimmons@aila.org.

USCIS Case Status Online Notification Delay

USCIS has alerted AILA that there is a several day delay in the system update to the USCIS Case Status Online. Cases that are approved at a Service Center, for example, may take up to a week to have the approval reflected in USCIS Case Status Online. USCIS is working to correct the problem as quickly as possible.

American Roots in the Immigrant Experience:
Immigrants and Children of Immigrants Comprise Nearly One-Quarter of the U.S. Population

The U.S. Census Bureau recently released data on the Latino population of the United States that underscores the extent to which the immigrant experience is embedded in the social (and political) fabric of the United States in three important ways: 

• Nearly one out of every four people in the United States in 2008 was either an immigrant or the child of an immigrant.  
• Immigrants who are naturalized U.S. citizens (and entitled to vote) accounted for 5 percent of the total U.S. population in 2008.
• Two-in-five immigrants came to this country before 1990 and therefore have deep U.S. roots.  More than one-third of Latino immigrants came to the United States prior to 1990. 

The political significance of these statistics should be apparent.  Latinos comprise the fastest-growing group of voters in the United States. The number of naturalized U.S. citizens is increasing rapidly.  And the electoral clout of "New American" voters who share a direct, personal connection to the immigrant experience-that is, naturalized citizens and the U.S.-born children of immigrants-is on the rise. Successful politicians will pay close attention to these demographic trends.

Inside Politics

Let’s keep the scare tactics out of the immigration debate.

I have to admit that I love scary movies. Having come clean about that, I have to say that this is one instance where my pleasure and business should never mix but unfortunately, and increasingly, seem to. It’s okay to be scared during Halloween (that’s actually kind of the point), but let us be very clear that the dangers we should fear this week are zombies and werewolves, and not the political paper tigers we’ve seen dragged back from the dead by opponents of immigration reform.

First off, Senator David Vitter is trying to scare us (again!) into thinking that immigrants pose a threat--this time by claiming that counting immigrants in the upcoming decennial census will disenfranchise millions of Americans. His solution: fear mongering and introducing an amendment that would require the Census Bureau to include a query about immigration status on the already printed questionnaires. Far from solving the problem at hand, Sen. Vitter’s amendment would cost millions to implement and also compromise the entire purpose of the census by discouraging participation. But Sen. Vitter’s amendment isn’t about trying to find a common sense policy solution, it’s about trying to flame the public sentiment against immigrants. It’s about fear.

Speaking of scare tactics, another proponent of the “immigrants-are-scary” school of thought was back in the lime light this week: Maricopa County Sherriff Joe Arpaio. Despite an ongoing Justice Department civil rights investigation into the practices of Sherriff Arpaio, this week DHS announced that Maricopa County is among the law enforcement agencies renewing their MOA in the 287(g) program, although only for jail enforcement. In an interview with Fox’s Glenn Beck Sherriff Joe vowed to continue enforcing federal immigration law as he always has based on his interpretation of a provision in IIRIRA "which is if local law enforcement comes across some people who have an erratic or scared or whatever or you know, they're worried. They have their speech, what they look like, if they look like they just came from another country… we can take care of that situation." Even Glen Beck was frazzled by Sherriff Joe's explanation. Scary indeed.

While these two real life nightmares continue to haunt us, we shouldn’t let ourselves be consumed by these peddlers of fear because this week also brought some great news.

The Senate and House passed the DHS FY10 Appropriations bill this week. Thanks to hard work from national and grassroots partners, the four enforcement-only amendments that would have hurt immigrants were stripped from the final bill. In addition to the absence of harmful amendments, the bill included three-year extensions of the Conrad 30, religious worker, and EB-5 programs and a provision repealing the "Widow Penalty" law. This is a great victory that we should take time to relish - but don't take your mind off the prize for too long because (take it from a scary movie buff) that's precisely when you're in the most danger of having some unspeakable monster jump out at you from behind the bushes. Boo!!

MYTH: Immigrants Are a Threat to Workable Health Care Reform!

As policymakers debate the scope and form of the health care reform package some anti-immigrant voices out there are already clamoring about the negative effects of immigrant participation in our health care system. But, before you throw your hands up in defeat when you hear someone repeat this myth, consider responding with these quick myth busting facts!

FACT: The more people who pay into a system of health insurance, the more everyone benefits. An important function of health insurance is to pool risks and use premiums collected from the healthy to pay for the medical care of those who need it.

FACT: U.S. citizens make up the majority of those who are uninsured. U.S. citizens make up the majority of the uninsured (78%), while legal and undocumented immigrants account for 22% of the non-elderly uninsured.

FACT: Immigrants do not impose a disproportionate financial burden on the U.S. health care system. According to a July 2009 study in the American Journal of Public Health, immigrants use less medical care, and less expensive care, even when they have health insurance.

Immigrants’ per-person medical expenditures were one-half to two-thirds less than U.S.-born citizens with similar characteristics. Health care costs for the average immigrant in America are 55% lower than health care costs for the average U.S.-born person. Another study found that, in 2005, average annual per capita health care expenditures for non-citizens were $1,797—versus $3,702 for U.S. citizens.

Recent immigrants were responsible for 1.4% of total public medical expenditures for adults in 2003, even though they constituted 5% of the population.

Breaking Down the Problems:
What’s Wrong With Our Broken Immigration System (Part 1):

Executive Summary
Over the past two decades, America has experienced dramatic political, cultural, and scientific advances that have redefined its role in the world. From the rapid expansion of new technologies that have changed the way we communicate, to two costly and consuming wars, to drastic economic changes, it is obvious that this is not the America of the 1990s. Yet, while the country changes and evolves, our immigration system remains frozen in time, locked into legal limits on immigration that were set in 1990 and subsequently restricted by laws passed in 1996. The impact of this outdated and inefficient immigration system on American society has been far-reaching. And as the problems have grown, so too has the level of emotion. Inflamed rhetoric often obscures the genuine problems and therefore hinders consensus on effective solutions. The first step in solving our immigration crisis is to understand the complex nature of these problems.

The Problems
It is misleading to characterize our immigration crisis as solely a question of what to do about the 11 to 12 million unauthorized immigrants living in the United States. Our problems extend to a much broader range of issues.

For instance:

• Insufficient numbers of visas are made available to bring in either high-skilled or less-skilled workers at the levels needed to meet the changing needs of the U.S. economy and labor market.

• Arbitrary visa caps have created long backlogs of family members who must wait up to 20 years to be reunited with family living in the United States.

• Wage and workplace violations by unscrupulous employers who exploit immigrant workers are undercutting honest businesses and harming all workers.

• - Inadequate government infrastructure is delaying the integration of unauthorized immigrants who want to legalize and become U.S. citizens.

Furthermore, the lack of a comprehensive federal solution has created a range of lopsided, enforcement-only initiatives that have cost the country billions of dollars, while doing little to impede the flow of unauthorized immigrants. In fact, the current immigration system’s structural failures, and the inadequate or misguided responses to these failures, have led to the largest unauthorized population in our nation’s history.

This paper, while not an exhaustive study of every problem within our immigration system, addresses several key areas and discusses issues stemming from the lack of federal response and long-delayed immigration reform. This paper begins with an explanation of how our current immigration system functions, and then defines and discusses the problems under two broad categories: Structural Failure and Inadequate Responses.

Why Don’t They Just Get In Line?
Permanent Legal Immigration Is Limited and Difficult. There are few legal ways for most immigrants to come to the United States, and all are restricted to certain categories of persons. For the vast majority of unauthorized immigrants, the idea that they could be legal if they would just “get in line” is incorrect. There is no “line” for most unauthorized immigrants. If you don’t fit into one of the limited categories, you cannot qualify for permanent legal status.

Structural Failure
Our nation’s immigration laws are outdated and inadequate to meet the needs of the United States in the 21st century.

Failures of the outdated immigration system have created the following issues:

• - Outdated visa caps that divide families and hurt U.S. businesses.
• - Deterioration of workplace conditions that harm all workers.
• - Lengthy backlogs on visa and citizenship applications.
• - 12 million unauthorized people living in limbo in the country.
• - 4 million U.S.-citizen children living in mixed status families with at least one parent who is an unauthorized immigrant.

Inadequate Responses
The U.S. government has tried without success to stamp out unauthorized immigration through enforcement efforts without a corresponding effort to address the pull of jobs and family. This approach has deepened the immigration crisis.

A lopsided response to unauthorized immigration has created the following issues:  

• - Despite spending billions of dollars, the problem is not going away.
• - Expensive and ineffective enforcement measures are not working.
• - The U.S. border has become more dangerous than ever.

This paper will be followed by a series of solutions-oriented papers that discuss potential fixes to our nation’s immigration crisis in the areas of Legalization, Family Immigration, Employment Verification, Citizenship and Naturalization, Enforcement, and Future Flow. While addressed individually, the key to effective immigration reform lies in resolving these issues together through a comprehensive solution that serves our nation’s economic and national-security interests.

How the Immigration System Currently Functions:
There are many misconceptions about how the legal immigration system works, leading many Americans to believe that unauthorized immigrants could be legal if they would just “get in line.” However, there was never any “line” for the vast majority of unauthorized immigrants. They do not have the necessary family relationships or employment connections to apply for legal entry, and very few qualify for refugee status. Those few who might have been eligible for a visa would have faced years or even decades of waiting time.

Permanent Legal Immigration is Limited and Difficult
There are limited legal ways for immigrants to come to the United States, and all are restricted to certain categories of persons. The current numerical caps were instituted decades ago and have not been responsive to our nation’s changing economic and labor demands. There are four main ways of immigrating legally and permanently to the United States. If you don’t fit into one these categories, you cannot qualify for permanent legal status:

- Family-based immigration. A legal, qualified family member in the United States can seek permission (by petition) to bring in certain eligible foreign-born family members. U.S. citizens can petition for “green cards” for their spouses, parents, children, and siblings. Legal Permanent Residents (green-card holders) can petition for their spouses and unmarried children. No other family relationships qualify. In all cases, the legal resident or U.S.-citizen family member must demonstrate an income level above the federal poverty line, and legally commit to support those family members brought to the United States.

- Employment-based immigration. People who wish to come to the United States on an employment-based visa, and who fit into one of the employment categories, must have a job offer in the United States and an employer willing to sponsor him or her – a process that can be very expensive and time consuming. Most of the qualifying professions are high-skilled and require high levels of education, targeting professionals like scientists, professors, and multinational executives, and there are insufficient legal channels for low-skilled workers.

- Humanitarian-based immigration. Each year the U.S. government provides protection within U.S. borders to a limited number of persons who are fleeing persecution in their homelands. These individuals must prove that they have a “well-founded fear of persecution” based on their race, religion, membership in a social group, political opinion, or national origin.

- Other. There are other, limited ways that people may obtain a green card, such as the diversity lottery.  However, these mechanisms are highly restrictive and limited to extremely small groups of qualified individuals.

Nonimmigrant Visas are Complicated, Confusing, and Often Unavailable When Needed
People also come to the United States as “non-immigrants” for temporary periods of time. The nonimmigrant visa category covers people like tourists, high-skilled workers, musicians on tour, students, farmworkers, and visiting scientists. While many of these workers truly are temporary, others aspire to remain in the United States but cannot do so because of the legal limitations described above.

Breaking Down the Problems:
What’s Wrong With Our Broken Immigration System (Part 2):

Structural Failure
U.S. immigration laws are outdated and inadequate to meet the needs of our society in the 21st century. The following five points highlight the areas of the immigration system that are broken and need remedy within a full and comprehensive reform package.

1. Family-based immigration backlogs mean that family members remain separated for long periods of time. Immigrants eligible to apply for family-based visas must wait for years, even decades, to reunite with their family members. There are three reasons for the enormous backlogs:

Demand exceeds supply. U.S. citizens are entitled to apply for visas for spouses, children, and parents without regard to overall caps, but other close family members, including children over the age of 21, must wait years to reunite with loved ones. For example, an immigrant residing in the United States legally with a green card must currently wait at least five years to receive a green card for her minor child. A naturalized U.S. citizen from the Philippines must wait over 20 years before obtaining a green card for a brother or sister.

Per-country limits create long backlogs in certain countries. In 1976, Congress created equal per-country caps for all countries in the world, meaning that Mexico is assigned the same annual quota as Iceland or Belgium. The result is that families from high-immigration countries—such as India, China, the Philippines, and Mexico—must wait disproportionately longer than families from low-demand countries. For example, if the married son or daughter of a U.S. citizen is a resident of Mexico, then he or she must wait 16 years for a U.S. green card.

Processing delays and inconsistent policies heighten problems and create more illegal entry. In the past, lack of resources and overly rigid bureaucratic procedures have led to breakdowns in the immigration system’s ability to conduct quick background checks, coordinate visa procedures between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of State, or make common-sense provisions for family reunification. While U.S. citizens and Legal Permanent Residents wait their turn to get a green card for their family member, it is nearly impossible for that family member to receive permission even to visit the United States. Mothers, fathers, and children therefore face either years of separation or the risks inherent in entering the United States illegally.

Case In Point
John D. Park emigrated to the United States with his family from Korea when he was ten years old. His family’s temporary visas were sponsored by a California company. While in the United States, John worked hard to learn English, and by his senior year in high school was a straight-A student with a 4.55 grade-point average, finishing at the top of his class. Just before college, he received word that his visa would soon expire, so he pursued the idea of having his U.S.-born sisters sponsor him for a green card. However, he soon found out that the long sibling backlog meant at least an eleven-year wait for a visa. By the age of 17, John had become an unauthorized immigrant. Without legal status, John would not be eligible for legal work or higher education. Returning to Korea meant living without his family in a country that he left as a child.

2. The employment-based visa system is not responsive to employers’ labor needs. Each year there are 140,000 employment-based green cards available to qualified immigrants. The number was set years ago by Congress, without regard to real labor-market needs, and has not been updated to conform to current economic realities. The numbers of workers who are necessary to fill gaps in our labor supply changes depending on a wide range of economic factors. In times of economic recession, like now, the current limit on employment-based green cards may be sufficient. However, the recession will end, the economy will rebound, and U.S. employers will need more workers. Some employers may need permanent workers to fill permanent jobs; others may require temporary workers to fill transitory gaps in certain industries or during particular seasons. In some cases, employers may only be able to obtain visas for temporary workers when they actually need permanent workers. Workers who arrive on temporary visas may find permanent jobs, but are unable to adjust to a permanent visa under the current system. In other words, the current system does not have the flexibility needed to respond to the country’s evolving economic needs.

Furthermore, the current visa allocation system leaves few visas for less-skilled workers. The types of jobs most associated with unauthorized immigrants are the least likely to qualify for work visas. Each year, the number of green cards available for less-skilled workers—such as hotel workers, landscapers, and construction workers—is limited to just 5,000 for the entire United States. The insufficient number of green cards available for these types of jobs is at the heart of the unauthorized immigration problem. Employers in restaurants, hotels, and other service-sector jobs who want to petition for immigrant workers because the local labor pool does not meet their demand face visa backlogs approaching 10 years. As a result, the immigration system provides no effective legal avenue for people abroad who wish to come to the United States to work in industries that need them. Until there are more legal avenues for employers to hire immigrant workers to meet economic demands, unauthorized immigration will continue to fill the gap, and we will not be able to regain control over immigration.

3. Millions of unauthorized workers and other immigrants, many of whom have U.S.-citizen families, reside in the United States with no means to become legal residents. Moreover, the lack of flexibility and discretion in existing immigration law further weakens their chance to obtain legal status. Efforts to penalize behavior such as overstaying a visa or working without authorization often produce unintended and illogical results. Many U.S. citizens are shocked to find that their immigrant spouse is not eligible for legal status because of non-criminal immigration violations, such as overstaying a visa (even when it happened many years in the past). In fact, there are severe consequences with few safety valves for legitimate exceptions or waivers. For example, the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA) created bars on admission to the United States for individuals who have been unlawfully present in the country for any period of time. Individuals who have been unlawfully present for more than 180 days, but less than one year, and who voluntarily depart, may not reenter the country for three years. People unlawfully present for an aggregate period of one year or more are subject to a ten-year bar. Because of such laws, even people otherwise eligible for employment-based or family-based visas are unable to adjust their status in the United States, and if they leave the country in order to get a visa at a U.S. consulate abroad, they cannot reenter the United States until the three- or ten-year period has passed. This means that unauthorized immigrants in the United States who are eligible for visas are encouraged to remain here illegally rather than risk being separated from family members for three years, ten years, or even permanently.

Case In Point
Juan Jose Morales was married to a U.S. citizen and was eligible for a visa. However, because he had been present in the United States without authorization, he was subject to the bars on admissibility. He remained illegally in the United States, rather than leaving to obtain his visa and then being subject to a bar on re-entry. He decided to go to Mexico to visit his mother for Mother’s Day in 2003, and used a smuggler to return to his home and his wife. Unfortunately, Morales never made it home to his family because the smuggler left him and 18 other immigrants to suffocate to death in a trailer.

4.  Unscrupulous employers who hire unauthorized workers in order to maximize profits are lowering wages and working conditions for ALL workers. Lack of legal status makes unauthorized workers extremely vulnerable to abuse by unscrupulous employers, and at the same time jeopardizes the competitiveness of those employers who try to follow the law. Because they have few labor protections and are often fearful of asserting their rights, joining an organizing campaign, or complaining about poor workplace conditions, unauthorized workers often endure low wages and poor, even dangerous, working conditions. Immigrant workers are often victims of wage theft by employers who pay less than minimum wage or do not pay them at all. This, in turn, is bad for all U.S. workers. When vulnerable unauthorized workers are willing to accept substandard wages and working conditions, it undermines U.S. workers in many industries, and makes it difficult for law-abiding employers to compete with those employers who hire unauthorized workers in order to make a bigger profit.

Researchers have found that on-the-job death rates for Latino workers are disproportionately high. Since records were first collected in 1992, statistics have shown that Latino workers are killed in the workplace at a higher rate than workers of other ethnic or racial groups. Immigrants are especially vulnerable because they tend to work in dangerous industries such as construction and agriculture, they may not be given the same safety equipment as other workers, and their lack of English skills may mean that they cannot read safety warnings. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, workplace deaths involving Latinos peaked in 2006, when 990 fatal injuries were reported. Recently, the gap between Latino and non-Latino workers has narrowed, but Mexican-born workers still accounted for 42 percent of foreign-born-worker deaths—the most of any group—in 2008.

Case In Point
In one of the most egregious examples of exploitation, owners of the Agriprocessors meat packing plant in Postville, Iowa, have been accused of a range of labor-law violations, such as sexual harassment, child labor (including 17-hour work days), and abuse (including one incident in which a floor supervisor allegedly blindfolded an immigrant with duct tape, “then took one of the meat hooks and hit the Guatemalan with it”).

5.  Inadequate infrastructure causes delays in the integration of immigrants who want to become U.S. citizens. Most Americans agree that we want immigrants to integrate into American culture, learn English, and become U.S. citizens. Immigrant integration benefits everyone because it enables immigrants to realize their full potential, contribute more to the U.S. economy, and develop deeper community ties. However, the United States has no comprehensive integration strategy. For example, despite a significant increase in demand for English classes, funding has repeatedly been cut for English as a Second Language (ESL) programs. As a result, there are currently wait lists of one to three years for adult ESL classes in most cities.

Naturalization is a powerful sign and symbol of integration into U.S. society. In order to become a U.S. citizen, an immigrant must first reside in the United States continuously for five years as a Legal Permanent Resident (three years in the case of the spouse of a U.S. citizen), or serve for at least one year in the U.S. Armed Forces. He or she must be of “good moral character” as determined by a criminal background check with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), be proficient in spoken and written English, and demonstrate a basic understanding of U.S government and history. And the would-be citizen must take an Oath of Allegiance to the United States, its Constitution, and its laws, and renounce allegiance to any other nation. Only by becoming a U.S. citizen can an immigrant vote in federal and most state elections, serve on a jury, run for public office, hold jobs that require a security clearance, or travel abroad for unrestricted periods of time. Moreover, only U.S. citizens can sponsor their siblings and married adult children to come to the United States, or bring their spouses, unmarried minor children, or parents here without being subjected to long waiting times.

Many immigrants are eager to demonstrate their commitment to this country by becoming U.S. citizens, but they face a costly naturalization process filled with bureaucratic obstacles and unfair delays.

- Naturalizations have been on the rise since the mid-1980s. According to a March 2009 report by the Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS), the “average annual number of persons naturalizing increased from less than 120,000 during the 1950s and 1960s to 210,000 during the 1980s, 500,000 during the 1990s and to 680,000 during 2000 to 2008.” More than one million immigrants became naturalized citizens in Fiscal Year (FY) 2008.

- The number of naturalization applications filed with USCIS nearly doubled from 730,000 to 1,380,000 in 2007.

- Last year, however, the number of immigrants applying to become U.S. citizens plunged 62 percent, as the cost of naturalization rose and the economy soured.

Since the early 1990s, the federal government has repeatedly failed to allocate the resources needed to effectively process the growing number of naturalization applications. The processing of applications for all immigration benefits, including naturalization, has been funded since 1988 primarily through fees paid by applicants themselves—not through direct congressional appropriations. The revenue generated by fees has not only proven insufficient to cover the costs of processing an ever-fluctuating number of applications, but is used to pay for other administrative tasks that are not directly related to the actual processing of applications. As a result, the processing of applications for naturalization, Legal Permanent Residence, and other immigration benefits has become a perpetually under funded operation subject to chronic backlogs and delays. Yet the application fees continue to increase, which may prevent or delay an immigrant’s opportunity to naturalize. In addition, certain elderly and disabled immigrants have difficulty meeting the eligibility requirements. Because of the problems in the naturalization process, immigrants who want to become U.S. citizens have difficulty doing so. The result of these delays is that, for the first time in many years, the number of immigrants attempting to naturalize has gone down.

Breaking Down the Problems:
What’s Wrong With Our Broken Immigration System (Part 3):

Inadequate Responses
For more than two decades, the U.S. government has tried to stamp out unauthorized immigration through enforcement efforts at the border and in the interior of the country, but without success—and without fundamentally reforming the broken immigration system that spurs unauthorized immigration in the first place. Missing has been a corresponding effort to address the inevitable pull of jobs and family. The following five points discuss this “enforcement only” strategy which has merely deepened the crisis:

6. The United States has spent billions of dollars on ineffective border enforcement. At the same time that spending on immigration enforcement has skyrocketed, the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has roughly tripled from 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008. (Research has shown that recent decreases in the number of unauthorized border crossings have little to do with enforcement, but are due primarily to the downturn in the U.S. economy.) Furthermore, the Pew Hispanic Center estimates that between 25 percent and 40 percent of all unauthorized immigrants do not sneak across the border, but come to the United States on valid visas and then stay after their visas expire, meaning that border enforcement is irrelevant to a large portion of the unauthorized population.

Yet, since 1992, the annual budget of the U.S. Border Patrol has increased by 714 percent; from $326.2 million in FY 1992 to $2.7 billion in FY 2009. At the same time, the number of Border Patrol agents stationed along the southwest border has grown by 390 percent; from 3,555 in FY 1992 to 17,415 in FY 2009. The Border Patrol has also increased its technological resources, ranging from fences and cameras to sensors and aircraft.

Since the creation of DHS in 2003, the budget of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the parent agency of the Border Patrol within DHS, has increased by 92 percent; from $6.0 billion in FY 2003 to $11.3 billion in FY 2009. The budget of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the DHS interior enforcement counterpart to CBP, has increased by 82 percent; from $3.3 billion in FY 2003 to $5.9 billion in FY 2009.  Despite all this additional spending, the number of immigrants entering the United States without authorization has not decreased as a result of additional enforcement.

7. Border security without adequate legal channels for immigration has created a more dangerous border and reduced “circularity” of migration. Because of increased border enforcement, it has become much more dangerous and expensive to cross the border. Operation Blockade and Operation Gatekeeper (initiated in 1993 and 1994, respectively), and other enhanced border enforcement measures, have successfully closed off traditional points of entry and diverted unauthorized migrants into more dangerous areas. The probability of death or injury as a result of heat exhaustion, exposure, suffocation, or drowning has increased. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found, in fact, that border deaths had more than doubled between 1995 and 2005.  Data show that the number of border deaths has increased dramatically in recent years, now reaching an average of approximately one death per day. In Arizona alone, the number of deaths increased by 20 percent during FY 2009; between October 1, 2008 and August 31, 2009, 191 immigrants died, according to the U.S. Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector. Border deaths typically increase during the hot summer months. At least 5,607 deaths occurred between 1994 and 2008, according to a report released in October 2009 by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico’s National Commission of Human Rights.

Because of increased enforcement along the U.S.-Mexico border, and the heightened risks of crossing the border, many unauthorized immigrants cannot survive the trip alone and rely on professional smugglers. Since the 1990s, migrants have paid enormous sums to smugglers to assist them and their family members in crossing the border. Smugglers charge over $2,000 to take people across the U.S.-Mexico border.  Often, migrants are indebted to the smugglers for years after they arrive in the United States, sometimes working as indentured servants until their debts are paid. Smugglers have also turned to kidnapping the loved ones of immigrants in order to extort additional money from their cargo. “Human smugglers think nothing of engaging in hostage taking and extortion to generate more profit for their illegal activities,” said John Morton, DHS Assistant Secretary for ICE.  Moreover, there have been increased reports of violence associated with rivalries between smuggling networks, affecting both immigrants and border communities.

Once in the United States, however, unauthorized immigrants are far less likely to leave than they would have been before the buildup of border enforcement in the mid-1990s. In the past, a large portion of unauthorized immigration to the United States tended to be “circular,” meaning that immigrants came here to work for short periods of time and earn money, and then returned to their home countries, often repeating the cycle. However, this has changed in recent years. Research confirms that migrants who intend to return to their home countries increasingly find themselves “stuck” in the United States. According to researchers Douglas Massey, Jorge Durand, and Nolan J. Malone, “the end result of a border buildup is typically longer trip durations, lower probabilities of return migration, and a shift toward permanent settlement.”  They found that in the early 1980s, the average stay of an unauthorized immigrant was two to three years; by 1990 it was nine years. Moreover, the probability that any one unauthorized immigrant would return home had decreased.  What had been a circular flow of migration had become permanent settlement, or “reduced circularity of migration.”

8. As border enforcement fails, electronic employment-verification programs (such as E-verify) are erroneously hailed as the next “magic bullet” to end unauthorized immigration. Over the past several years, one of the proposed “solutions” to the problem of unauthorized immigration has been expansion of the E-Verify employment-verification system.  E-Verify is a federal web-based program through which U.S. businesses can attempt to verify the work authorization of new hires. E-Verify is a voluntary system, except where state laws require businesses to register to use E-Verify, as well as a few other exceptions in which the federal government has made E-Verify mandatory. There have been multiple attempts to expand E-Verify and make it mandatory for all employers. This is despite the fact that E-Verify is an extremely controversial program because of the high probability for database errors, misuse of the system by employers, and the burden it imposes on the Social Security Administration (SSA).  Furthermore, E-Verify does not even identify unauthorized workers effectively. Some unauthorized workers are erroneously confirmed as authorized to work because E-Verify cannot identify counterfeit, stolen, or borrowed identity documents. And E-Verify cannot identify unauthorized workers when employers who knowingly hire them simply do not run their workers through the system, or when work is performed “off the books” in the underground economy.

Perhaps most importantly, while touted as an immigration-enforcement tool, the reach of E-Verify goes well beyond immigrants. If E-Verify were to become a mandatory, nation-wide program, it would affect every single person who works in the United States, including native-born U.S. citizens. Even tiny error rates would mean big problems for large numbers of U.S. citizens and other legal workers. Under a mandatory E-Verify, approximately 60 million new hires would have to be verified annually, and up to 3 million U.S. workers per year would have to navigate government bureaucracy to fix database errors.

Unfortunately, many people still believe that electronic employment verification is a straightforward and simple solution to the problem of unauthorized work in the United States. However, years of experience with employer sanctions, the I-9 system, and the E-Verify program have proven that the devil is in the details, and that even the best intentions can result in harmful consequences for some people. Furthermore, no employment-verification system alone can resolve the problems created by our broken immigration system. A mandatory employment-verification system must be part of comprehensive immigration reform which requires unauthorized immigrants to legalize their status and creates legal pathways for future workers to come to the United States.

Case In Point
Ken Nagel, a restaurant owner in Phoenix, recently hired one of his own daughters—a native-born U.S. citizen—to work in his restaurant. When he put her information through E-Verify, he received a “tentative nonconfirmation,” meaning the system could not verify that she was authorized to work in the United States.

9. Interior immigration enforcement measures are resulting in an enforcement culture that criminalizes immigration violations and results in mistakes and civil rights violations. Immigration enforcement has consistently focused on identifying individuals for deportation, and then deporting them. One measure of our immigration-enforcement priorities is the ICE detention system. ICE operates the largest detention and supervised-release program in the country. A total of 378,582 immigrants from 221 countries were in custody or supervised by ICE in FY 2008; activities in 2009 remain at a similar level. On September 1, 2009, ICE had 31,075 immigrants in detention at more than 300 facilities throughout the United States and territories, with an additional 19,169 immigrants in Alternative to Detention programs.

Since 1994, the number of detention beds available has increased six-fold, from 6,785 to 33,400 in 2008.  At the same time, the number of crimes for which immigrants may be deported, and the categories of crimes for which immigrants may be subject to mandatory detention, have expanded. Since 2005, ICE detention bed space has increased 78 percent. During 2008 alone, ICE detained a record 378,582 persons—a 60 percent increase from 2005.  Between 2005 and 2009, the ICE budget for detention nearly doubled from $860 million to $1.72 billion.

The ever-expanding ICE detention program is emblematic of enforcement-only policies which have harmful side effects that go far beyond the unauthorized population. It is important to recognize that unauthorized immigrants live in “mixed-status” families and communities, meaning that U.S. citizens, legal immigrants, and unauthorized immigrants live in the same households and neighborhoods. Policies meant to target unauthorized immigrants also impact their family members, employers, and neighbors. A large number of the people affected are U.S.-citizen children. Nationwide, there are approximately four million U.S.-citizen children with at least one unauthorized-immigrant parent, and policies that target their parents have grave effects on the children. Worksite raids, door-to-door raids, and other policies that lead to the detention and deportation of unauthorized immigrants separate parents from children and husbands from wives. U.S.-citizen children are left in an untenable situation when one (or both) of their parents is deported. Furthermore, because immigration law is so complex, enforcement has led to mistakes and civil rights violations. U.S. citizens have been erroneously detained and even deported.

Cases In Point
Pedro Guzman, a U.S. citizen born in California, was deported to Mexico when the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office determined that Mr. Guzman was a Mexican national. Mr. Guzman, who is cognitively impaired, was sent to Mexico—a country where he had never lived—where he survived by eating out of trash cans for several months and bathing in rivers. 

Juana Villegas, a pregnant woman, was detained by police after being stopped for a traffic violation. On July 3, 2008, she was driving in Nashville (where local police officers have an agreement with ICE to enforce immigration laws) when she was pulled over for “careless driving.” Mrs. Villegas, nine months pregnant, was forced to wait in her hot car with her three children for over an hour. Eventually, the children were allowed to leave with a family member without Villegas’s permission, and she was taken into custody. By the time Mrs. Villegas was released from the county jail six days later, she had gone through labor with a sheriff’s officer standing guard in her hospital room, where one of her feet was cuffed to the bed most of the time. County officers barred her from seeing or speaking with her husband. Up until an hour before the actual birth, Mrs. Villegas’s hand and foot remained shackled to the hospital bed. Mrs. Villegas appeared in court and was sentenced to time served for driving without a license. The charge of careless driving was dismissed.

10. The enforcement-only model has pushed immigrants further underground, undermining community safety and national security. Unauthorized immigrants are often reluctant to report crimes they have witnessed or been victims of because they fear they may be deported as a result of coming forward. When unauthorized immigrants and their family members are reluctant to cooperate with the police and report crimes, everyone in the community is less safe. The failure to come forward as witnesses and victims makes the work of the police much more difficult, and means that crimes against Americans go unsolved. Law enforcement officials themselves have stated time and time again that trust with immigrant communities is crucial to preventing and investigating crimes, and hence essential to maintaining safe communities. That trust cannot be gained under the current system.

In some communities, it is well known that local police are working with ICE to enforce federal immigration laws. Not only does this frighten the immigrant community and make them less willing to cooperate, but it takes resources away from crime fighting. In Maricopa County, Arizona, for example, Sheriff Joe Arpaio has diverted county resources away from investigating crimes and has spent them on immigration enforcement. As a result, response times to 911 calls have increased, arrest rates have dropped, and thousands of felony warrants have not been served.

Furthermore, the current broken immigration system does not enhance our national security. There are nearly 12 million unauthorized immigrants living in the United States, and billions of dollars are being spent trying to identify and deport them. Americans cannot be secure under a system that allows smugglers and traffickers, rather than the U.S. government, to decide who enters the country. Immigration reforms that bring immigrants out of the shadows, correctly identify them, and encourage people to enter the United States through legal channels would allow law-enforcement and border-enforcement agents to focus on people who pose a threat to national security or public safety.

Case In Point
In 2003, the Tampa Tribune reported on the murder of a Mexican national named Petra Martinez and her son Urel Martin. The local police department believed that some members of the community had information on the case, but declined to come forward for fear of immigration-related repercussions. Clearwater Police Department’s Hispanic Outreach Officer William Farias said he “wasn’t surprised people were hesitant to talk… cultural differences and fear of deportation often keep undocumented immigrants from coming forward.”

A 2007 headline read, “Immigrants Deported After Calling Police,” after a woman in Carrollton, Georgia, was arrested when she called for help after being attacked in her home.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform is Necessary
While the U.S. immigration system appears to be fair, reasonable, and highly regulated on paper, the facts on the ground illustrate that it is badly broken and in urgent need of reform. A continuation of our “enforcement-only” policies is not a practical or effective solution. Under the existing system, people are dying at the border, immigrants are living and working in abject conditions, families trying to reunite legally are separated for many years, employers are unable to hire the workers that they need, U.S. workers suffer from the unlevel playing field shared with exploited immigrant workers, and law-abiding U.S. employers are in unfair competition with unscrupulous employers who increase profits by hiring cheap and vulnerable labor. Meanwhile, the United States continues to spend billions of dollars maintaining this system.

Most Americans understand that we cannot deport 12 million people or hope that they will choose to “self-deport.” It is clear that relentlessly building up enforcement resources has not worked in the past and is not a realistic solution to our current problems. The underlying flaws of the legal immigration system must be addressed first. The United States must create a fair, humane, and practical immigration system for the 21st century that is responsive to the needs of our economy and encourages legal behavior.

Get In The Line? What Line? The Tragic Tale of Employment Based Immigrant Visa Delays

I had a very upset client contact me this last week. He was angry . . . at the Visa Bulletin. He could not understand how, after the start of the new fiscal year, there was essentially no movement in the visa numbers. I tried to calm him by telling him that he just needed to be patient. Then I realized how patronizing that sounded. How much longer did he need to wait? He has an approved immigrant visa petition (EB-3) with an early 2005 priority date in the worldwide category. So, I decided to try to figure out when he might actually get his green card. I ask that you bear with me through this process. This is a LONG post, but one I think you will appreciate reading.

I have to warn you now, this math is a shot in the dark. I do NOT have all of the numbers of pending and approved cases in each category of employment based immigration. However, some estimate, based upon some pretty good numbers, is better than mere guesswork. Let me walk you through this analysis.

However, I first ask you to forgive me in advance, math is the reason I went to law school. Also, the USCIS simply has not released clear numbers (possibly for fear of letting folks know exactly how long their wait will actually be).

My focus for this analysis will be in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories, since it is in those categories that our clients are most interested. There are four basic numbers we are looking for, NONE of them are easy to find. Let's discover the basic numbers we will be using:

First, how many approved I-140 cases are awaiting a visa number? According to AILA's recent liaison meeting with DOS, there are 198,186 "case ready" I-140 petitions awaiting visa issuance, in the EB-2 (52,584), EB-3 (139,737) and EW (5,865) categories. Case ready means (as best as we understand), that as soon as the petition is current, the Adjustment will be approved or consular processing will begin. Obviously, the EB-2 numbers are only for India and China.

Second, how many pending I-140 cases are there at the Service Centers awaiting adjudication? According to the June 2009, USCIS Production Update Report to Congress, USCIS had 85,970 pending I-140 cases awaiting adjudication. Unfortunately, USCIS does not break out the I-140 cases in this report between EB-2 and EB-3. These are the most recent numbers I could find.

Third, how many pending I-140 cases are at the District Offices? I have no idea! I cannot locate anywhere the numbers of cases at the local USCIS offices. No one knows. Really. There is no report that I can find where this number has been released. And, frankly, I do not believe that USCIS has an accurate count on this either (I do pray they get such a count soon).

Fourth, how many pending labor certifications are there at the DOL? This number is actually pretty sure. There are 62,100 pending labor certifications as of the September 22 stakeholder meeting with DOL (not counting pending appeals). Unfortunately, again, we do not know which of the categories (EB-2 or EB-3) the cases will fall under.

Now, it is time for the math. Assuming all pending Labor Certifications and pending I-140s are approved (yes, I know some will be denied and some are duplicates), there are at least a total of 346,256 individuals with approved or soon to be approved petitions awaiting green cards, not including their families. If we assume an average family size of 4 people (I believe this is a safe assumption), there are 1,385,024 people waiting on employment based green cards in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.

I know the number is huge! And next we have to try to fit that number into the two separate EB categories. Unfortunately, we have two problems in doing this. The first problem we have is that we do not know how many of these I-140 cases are in the EB-2, or EB-3 categories. So, let's use a little deductive reasoning here. Using experience and best guessing based upon the division we already know about in the numbers of cases from the DOS, lets say 26% are EB-2 (360,162), and 74% are EB-3 (1,024,917).

The second problem is that we do not have a per country breakdown. (I hope the USCIS has that breakdown). How to account for this? Again, let's estimate based upon the DOS numbers, that India accounts for 70% of the EB-2 and 39% of the EB-3 numbers and that China accounts for 30% of the EB-2 and only 3% of the EB-3 numbers and the rest of the world accounts for 58% of the EB-3 numbers.

We also know the maximum numbers available in any given year for all family and employment based categories is 25,630 (with some caveats), and that there are only a total of 80,000 employment based immigrant visas in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories combined (with some flow down from other categories).

You can see we have leaped, jumped, guessed, and assumed our way to the follow conclusions:

India EB-3 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification filed today: 15.8 years. This generous estimate comes from the fact that an estimated 399,717 Indian Nationals waiting for 25,630 visas a year. This estimate completely ignores the possible immigration of any family based immigrants which would subtract from this total and increase the wait time, and the number that would flow down from other immigrant visa categories, so the wait time is probably longer.

China EB-2 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification (or NIW) filed today: 4.1 years. This estimate comes from the estimated 108,048 Chinese Nationals waiting for 25,630 visas a year. This estimate completely ignores the possible immigration of any family based immigrants that would subtract from this total and increase the wait time, and the number that would flow down from other immigrant visa categories.

Worldwide EB-3 wait for permanent residence for a labor certification filed today: Well, there are 594,451 people waiting in this queue. The limiting factor here will be the 80,000 annual limit on employment based immigration. Excluding per country limits and flow down from other employment based immigrant visa categories, this is at least a 8.1 year wait.
And these waits are from when the person STARTS the green card, not when they come into the United States.
I can now tell my client a waiting date based upon, at least, some real numbers. But, I will still be wrong. The dates are not accurate, but at least it is not made up out of whole cloth. But we now all understand that we cannot look at the Visa Bulletin and actually determine how long the wait is.

The point of this whole exercise, besides telling my client how long he still might have to wait, is to point out the consequences of these numbers.

Line? What Line? These are employment based immigrants. Every single one has a job offer, an employer, and a certification that either there are no qualified, willing and able US workers for the job, or that the individual is so good, we do not even have to test the labor market. We need these people. We want these people. How many do you think will now just give up and go home?

This delay in legal, employment based immigration is a crisis for America. If you are an intending immigrant, and your immigration option is employment based, do you have the patience the wait 15 years for your green card? Can you do better in Australia, Canada, or even back home in your home country? What is the cost to our future competitiveness of a broken legal immigration system? What is the cost to U.S. innovation?

I believe these numbers have a purpose. The purpose is immigration reform, and not just a legalization. We all know that a broken legal immigration system causes illegal immigration. We need to fix the legal immigration system now! We need to modify the process, significantly shorten the wait and increase the numbers to meet the demand. We need to not include family members in the total calculated visa numbers. And, Yes, we need to make these change even in a struggling economy. We must maintain the great benefits that positive, focused employment based immigration has delivered to America. The reality is that Congress must act to help save the future of American innovation and economic growth. And, they must do it now.

TOP>