Archive for the ‘Illegal Immigration’ Category

In Trump era, Bay Area churches offer sanctuary to undocumented immigrants – The Mercury News

var _ndnq = _ndnq || []; _ndnq.push();

When Julissa Oliva and Jose Manuel Flores first arrived at the Primera Iglesia Presbiteriana Hispana churchlastMay,they had nothing to their names.

Fleeing what they described as months of extortion from gang members in Tegucigalpa the capital of Honduras and one of the most violent cities in the world the undocumented couple left with their two young children and$300 in their pockets, making a treacherous 30-day journey through Mexico.

They eventually found refuge in Oakland, where Oliva has a sister and where the Presbyterian church on High Street offered them hope and the necessities they needed to survive in an unknown land.

Were starting at zero. Their support helps a lot, both morally and economically,Oliva said in Spanish.But were up in the air. Im not in a detention center but I do feel as if Im imprisoned because I dont know whats going to happen.

Churches such as Primera Iglesia in largely Latino and immigrant communities are expected to take on a more significant role under the Trump administration, which haspromised mass deportations and major changes in immigration policy. Already, dozens of Bay Area churches have declared themselves sanctuary churches in recent months, joining hundreds of others nationwide that have vowed toprotect their most vulnerable parishioners even if that puts them at odds with federal policy or law.

For immigrant communities and emerging communities, churches, synagogues, mosques and gurdwaras are all safe places where immigrants naturally gather for resources, said the Rev. Jon Pedigo, director of projects for peace and justice for the Diocese of San Jose. So its only natural that an immigrant community would turn to their churches for support, counseling, rent assistance and food assistance.

The Olivas are some of the more than 100 undocumented residents that Primera Iglesia has helpedin the past two years, offering resources ranging from temporary housing tolegal referrals. An estimated 400,000 undocumented residents live in Santa Clara, Contra Costa and Alameda Counties combined, regions with some of the states largest undocumented immigrant populations, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

In the South Bay, more than 30 congregations of different denominations are determining how they can help those seeking refuge when the time comes. The number of congregations seeking to help our network increases by the week, Pedigo said.

John Rinaldo, director of parish partnerships for Catholic Charities in Santa Clara County, said that while the regions 53 Catholic churches may not formally use the term sanctuary, they provide assistance to vulnerable populations any way they can, rarely turning away people in need.

The role of churches as refugesgrew dramatically in the 1980s,when thousands of Central American refugees flocked to the U.S during a devastating civil war. In what became knownas The Sanctuary Movement,churches formed an underground railroad for refugees, arguing that Gods law to shelter and protectstrangers outweighed civil law.

Churches, mosques, or synagogues offering sanctuary do so in the name of just law a distinction at the heart of Dr. Martin Luther Kings nonviolent civil disobedience, said Dr. Bill ONeill, a professor at Santa Clara Universitys Jesuit School of Theology in Berkeley.

Not all faith communities are on board. Some say houses of worship shouldnt take political stands, while others refuse to support illegal immigration, no matter the circumstance.

There are some people, and some Christians who may be well-meaning, but who have absolutely no idea how much damage they are causing by saying we should allow (undocumented immigrants) to stay, said the group Christians against Illegal immigration on its Facebook page. The United States, as every other country in the world, has a right and duty to enforce immigration laws.

Today,a rapidly growing modern Sanctuary Movement is givingchurches a national platform. More than 400 faith communities have joined the movement, vowing to do what Congress and the administration refuse to do: protect and stand with immigrants facing deportation, the group said.

At a recent forum on immigrant rightsat Primera Iglesia Presbiteriana Hispana,dozens of faith leaders and organizers from across the Bay Areabrainstormed ways to become sanctuaries in their own communities.

The concept of sanctuary has been evolving because our times are evolving,said the Rev. Deborah Lee, immigration program director for the Oakland-based Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity, a member of the national Sanctuary Movement.

Its a time for us to come together to better organize ourselves, to prepare for what might be in store, and also to figure out how do we expand and invite others to join us.

In the chilly, small churchthe group discussedhow they would stand up for undocumented immigrants, with some participants sayingthey would bewilling to hide them from federal officials to keep them in the country. Already, a Berkeley churchhas built a sanctuary apartment in its basement, ready to house an individual or a family.

The families havent stopped coming. We need the churches around us to open their doors and take action, said Irma Hernandez,a naturalized U.S. citizen who fledEl Salvador during the civil war and now assists other immigrants at the Presbyterian church.

Praying is good. But sometimes words trail off. We need to do something concrete. We need to act, she said. The families outside our doors are crying, screaming out for help.

Oliva and Flores said they were robbed during their journey to the U.S. They recall begging for food, sleeping at bus terminals and narrowly avoiding other encounters with criminals who often prey on Central American immigrants passing through Mexico. Exhausted and out of options, they turned themselves in to immigration officials at the border crossing in Mexicali, where they were detained separately.

Oliva, 29, and her children, Liz, 5, and Hector, 1, were released after just a few days while Flores, 35, was detained for two months.They nowawait pending court dates.

The familycurrently lives in a house in the Fruitvale district, lent to them and another immigrant family by a local parishioner.

Here, we live day-by-day,Flores said. My next court date is in four years. Without a work permit and without any other aid, Im not sure how were going to make it.

ButOliva and Flores still hope to build a life here.

We dont come here to do harm to anyone. We immigrated from one country to another in search of better opportunities, Oliva said. There are lots of opportunities here but there are also many difficulties. I dont know whats going to happen. What awaits us.

Read the rest here:
In Trump era, Bay Area churches offer sanctuary to undocumented immigrants - The Mercury News

How LAPD’s law-and-order chief revolutionized the way cops treated illegal immigration – Los Angeles Times

Longtime Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl F. Gates built areputation with aggressivepolicingprogramsthat may have made the city saferbut alsocasta shadow ofrepressionover its citizens, especially blacks andLatinos.

Butin 1979, responding tothe wave of illegal immigration, it was Gates who issued the policythat has since defined a tolerant posture toward the immigrant community a policy employed by the LAPD and scores of other law enforcement agencies across the nation.

Special Order 40 prohibited officers from initiating contact with anyone for the sole purpose of learning their immigration status and ruled out arrests for violation of U.S. immigration law.

Its purpose was to build trust so that fear of deportation would not dissuade immigrants who were crime victims or witnesses from cooperating with police.

The policy has faced repeated attacks both from factions within the LAPD aswell as anti-immigration activists who have challenged it on constitutional and practical grounds, saying it gives a free pass to criminals in the country illegally.

It now is facing renewedscrutiny as President Trump pushes a new crackdown on illegal immigration. While details are not fully developed, Trump has said he wants local law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration officials and has threatened to cut off federal funding to those who dont.

Like a long line of Los Angelesleadersbefore them, Mayor Eric Garcetti and Police Chief Charlie Beck have stood up forSpecial Order 40,even as it faces a potential threat under the new presidents executive order issued Jan. 25.

Special Order 40s survivalfor nearly 40 years is based onGates conception of the ruleas a policing tool, notan immigration policy.

A law-and-order police chief crafting a policy that protects immigrants lacking proper papers may seem ironic,but to some who knew Gates, it isnt so simple.

Attorney and longtime LAPD criticConnie Rice, who deposed Gates three times in lawsuits dealing with police misconduct, said he was not the racist he was portrayed to be.

There was always a kind of duality to Gates that wasnt that visible because the bad stuff was screaming loud and the good stuff was under the table, Rice said. Whats fascinating to me, given that some chiefs were far more racist, is that Gates in LAPD culture was considered progressive on racial issues.

Rice said Gates has been viewed as racially hostile because he didnt stop the racism within LAPD culture, even if he himself didnt subscribe to those views.

Joseph Wambaugh, the author of best-selling books on LAPD culture, suggested that any contradiction was in Gates himself.

Chief Gates was into the quasi-military, hard-ass approach in dealing with street crime, Wambaugh, a former LAPD officer, wrote in an email. But I never sensed any negative feelings from him about the undocumented or Latinos in general.

Wambaugh said many Latino men and women rose to important roles under Gates.

Gatesretired in 1992 under fire for his failure to prepare for the riots that followedacquittals in the police beating of Rodney King. He continued to speak out in support of Special Order 40, the last time in a speech before the City Council two years before his death in 2010.

Some of his heavy-handed initiatives faded awayin disrepute. Among them were the Public Disorder Intelligence Division, or PDID, which was disbanded after the city settled a lawsuit alleging that it unlawfully infiltrated and harassed progressive groups.

Community Resources Against Street Hoodlums the CRASH program survived throughthe 1990s, when it became a rap music motif for police oppression in the black community.

Defenders of Special Order 40 say it served multiple policing goals.

Bayan Lewis, anLAPD veteran who was briefly interim chief in the 1990s, said one of those goals was to stop officers from padding theirstatistics with arrests that had nothing to do with crime.

If you were short on misdemeanors, youdjust book someone on illegal entry, Lewis said. The jail would call the feds. The feds would come or not come. Most of the time they did not, because they were shorthanded.

Lewis said the long-standing benefit of Special Order40 has been that people who talk to us know we dont care if they are documented or undocumented. Were not doing federal work anymore.

Butthe policy became a target with the continued growthof the immigrant population and the eruption of anti-immigrant sentiment after the 1992 riots.

Critics contend that local police have a constitutional duty to enforce immigration laws and help federal authorities identify and deport those who are in the country without legal status.

The LAPD isunder no obligation to go out and do ICEs job, said Ira Mehlman, media director for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, referring to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But at the very least they should offer the same level of cooperation they offer other police agencies.

Although a vibrant dissent continues on several websites seeking tougher enforcement ofimmigration laws,the courts have given thosearguments no traction.

Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group,filed suit in Los Angeles Superior Court seeking an order to prevent the LAPD from enforcing the policy.

It violates the state and federal law by prohibiting the maximum amount of cooperation between the Police Department and immigration authorities in enforcing immigration laws," said Candice E. Jackson, an attorney for the group.

An appeals court in 2009 upheld a lower courts decision to throw out the lawsuit.

A Times series onthe brutal riseof the 18th Street gang led to another public debate overSpecial Order 40 in the late 1990s. One articlecited a confidential California Department of Justice report saying that as many as 60% of the estimated 20,000 18th Streeters were in the country illegally.

Then-LAPD gang czarJohn D. White, a deputy chief,told the City Councils Public Safety Committeethatbecause witnesses and victims of gang violence are often intimidated into silence,being able to work with the Immigration and Naturalization Servicemore closely would allow the LAPD another means of getting gang members off the streets by deporting them under federal law.

Six months later, White backtracked, saying adepartment reviewconcluded that the rule was nothindering anti-gang operations. Throwing every illegal out of the country is not going to solve those problems, White said.

The most visceral challenge to Special Order 40followedthe fatal shooting in 2008 of Jamiel Shaw II,a 17-year-old African American high school football player, by a gang member who was in the country illegally.

The youths parents,Jamiel Shaw Sr. and Anita Shaw, an Army sergeant who hadservedin Iraq, asked the City Council to change the policy so officers would routinely check the immigration status of known gang members who are crime suspects. They saidit would make it easier to immediately deport them.

Their cause got some support from the black community, including commentator EarlOfari Hutchinson, who wrote, Amending, or even repealing, Special Order 40 won't bring Shaw's son back. Yet something must be done to patch the holes that allow violent criminals who are here illegally to fall through the cracks.

Police factions opposed to the order were given public voice by then-Councilman Dennis Zine, a former LAPD officer. He proposed that officers be required to check the immigration status of any gang member they suspect of being in the country without authorization, even if the person had not been arrested.

Arousing public debate followed in which The Times published brief comments by 40 prominent citizens. Most, including Gates, Rice andWambaugh, argued for the status quo.

There will be no integrity to our criminal justice system without it," Rice wrote.African Americans cannot be advocating racial profiling, which is what ending Special Order 40 would amount to.

The council once again reaffirmed the policy.

But the Shaw case later became a rallying cry for Trump and his crackdown on illegal immigration.

Trump actually used the case in a political advertisement last year.

Jamiel Shaw Sr. appeared at several early Trump rallies. Trump gave Shaw a prime speaking spot during the Republican National Convention.

Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime, he said during the speech. It needs to be dealt with. We need to secure the border, you know, we need to make America safe. We need to be able to live without being shot dead in the street.

After Novembers election,Garcetti and Beck reiterated their support for Special Order 40.

doug.smith@latimes.com

Twitter: @LATDoug

More:
How LAPD's law-and-order chief revolutionized the way cops treated illegal immigration - Los Angeles Times

Letter: Illegal immigration ends up hurting us all – New Bern Sun Journal

Frank Bolen, New Bern

The media seems to be grouping all immigrants into one definition.

The vast majority of the people in the United States are immigrants. We cannot all claim to be descendants of American Indians.

Whether you are an immigrant or it was your parent, grandparent or great-grandparent, etc.,that is not important. The important part of being an immigrant is, did you or the family member get here legally?

Basically I am trying to say that we have to remember we have two types of immigrants legal and illegal. There is a difference. Legal immigrants have many and sincere rights in these United States. Many, if not most, have become citizens. Illegal immigrants should not have any of those rights. They are here illegally. They have broken our laws and we are supposed to be a nation of laws.

Legal immigration is and has been welcomed in this country and will continue to be. Yes, these immigrants should be fully vetted and then welcomed to become a true part of these great United States.

However, illegal immigration must be stopped. It does not help and actually injures all Americans, including immigrants who are legally here.

It is time to change. We must immediately get back to a country of laws.

See the original post:
Letter: Illegal immigration ends up hurting us all - New Bern Sun Journal

Keep illegal immigrants at bay by axing freebies – Wyoming Tribune

I have a solution to the illegal immigration problem. I have no illusions that any of this will ever take place, but this is what happens when an old man has time to just sit and cogitate. (I know that cogitating can be dangerous, but I still do it.)

My solution? Remove any and all incentives for anyone to come to America illegally. Make the E-Verify system mandatory. Make it next to impossible for an illegal to find work or earn any money. Then stop all the free stuff. No food stamps, no welfare and no subsidies of any kind. The only freebie would be a free ticket back to where they came from.

Of course, there would have to be exceptions, but on a case-by-case basis and based on humanitarian concerns.

For any illegal that commits a crime, a special prison, perhaps similar to the tent prison Sheriff Joe built in Arizona. No television, no radios and no recreational facilities. Also feed them a very bland and bare-subsistence diet. Then, make any crime a minimum 30 days, and after they complete the sentence, deport them with a warning that if they come back and are caught, they will go back to that prison for double the time of their original sentence.

I think this solution would solve the illegal immigration problem, and I guarantee it would cause widespread outrage, demonstrations and riots all across America by the bleeding-heart liberals. So be it!

More here:
Keep illegal immigrants at bay by axing freebies - Wyoming Tribune

Texas County Demands Fed Payback for Jailing Illegal Aliens – Breitbart News

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The federal State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) requires that the county report criminal illegal aliens that have been housed in jail for four or more days.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The demand comes after President Donald Trump signed executive orders to withhold federal monies from sanctuary cities, temporarily halt refugeesfrom any country for 120 days, and block travel from seven Muslim-majority nations.

We have decided to be compliant in working with immigration services, and so we turn over all that data to them. But the fact of the matter is they dont pick them up right away and we continue to incur that cost, Bexar County (San Antonio) Judge Nelson Wolff told the local ABC affiliate. Wolff is the county judge of the 17th most populated county in the United States.

A few days ago, Wolffwrote letters to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) requesting that the federal government completely reimburse the county for costs incurred over the last 12 years for housing criminal illegal aliens, reportedSan Antonio-Express News.

The letter begins:

Bexar County complies with federal laws associated with detainment of undocumented immigrants. The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) requires Bexar County to report undocumented inmates that have been housed for four or more consecutive days in the Bexar County Adult Detention Center and have either one felony offense or two misdemeanor offenses within one fiscal year. Under the terms of the SCAAP agreement, Bexar County was to be reimbursed for holding federal immigration detainees.

TheExpress-Newsreported that Wolff said,The topic has come up about immigration and state funding I thought it was time to make it public of how much it costs local governments. Its not just a theoretical issue, its an expensive issue.

The county judge was reported to say that he will continue to comply with the law even if the county does not receive reimbursement.

Wolff wrote in his letter, Bexar County is willing to comply with federal immigration laws, but this has created a large burden on local property taxpayers that should be paid for by the federal government. He added, This burden on local government violates the principles of the SCAPP agreement.

The unfunded mandates by the federal government have become even more underfunded, reported the San Antonio area paper citing a report by the National Conference of State Legislatures. When the SCAAP first began in 1995, Congress put aside $130 million for the program, and between 2006 and 2009, that allocation was $400 million a year. The funding has decreased to $238 million, which covers roughly 18 percent of the costs to local jails.

SCAAP payments are not made where local and state entities cannot verify that those jailed are illegal aliens. Costs for unknown inmates are not reimbursed. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, this accounted for 58 percent of the program in 2010.

Lana Shadwickis a contributing writer and legal analyst for Breitbart Texas. She has served as a prosecutor and associate judge in Texas. Follow her on Twitter@LanaShadwick2.

See the original post here:
Texas County Demands Fed Payback for Jailing Illegal Aliens - Breitbart News