Mediaboss Marketing

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The White Houses Jan. 27 immigration reform threatens companies ability to attract talent, business, and investment to the United States, says the legal brief by the companies, who include many Silicon Valley firms. The signers include Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, Reddit, Paypal, Netflix, Lyft, and TaskRabbit, which helps wealthier people hire other people to do household chores.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The 53-page, green-eyeshade demand for economic benefits was submitted Feb. 5 to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as part of the legal battle to block the popular reform.

The new reform follows the presidents campaign promises by curbing the annual inflow of taxpayer-supported refugees, and setting rules to exclude migrants with hostile attitudes, such as an ideological willingness to use violence.

The companies legal brief is focused on their claim that they will lose their ability to hire foreign workers for some of white-collar jobs sought by American graduates.

Each year, roughly 800,000 young Americans graduate from college with skilled degrees in business, science, medicine and technology. But many of the graduates are not working in jobs that match their technical skills. For example, from 2009 to 2013, about one-fifth of underemployed recent college graduatesroughly 9 percent of all recent graduatesdid work in a low-skilled service job, says a 2016 report by two federal economic researchers.

The federal government annually imports 1 million legal immigrants, and allows companies to hire roughly 1 million foreigncontract-workers.The inflow of white-collar contract workers is so large that roughly 1 million are now legally employed in white-collar jobs in the United States, including 100,000 H-1B contract-workers holding prestigious jobs at universities.

Many companies want to preserve the inflow of cheaper white-collar workers. For example, executives at Comcast organized a demonstration against the immigration and refugee reform.

According to the courtroom brief by the technology companies:

The [reform]effects a sudden shift in the rules governing entry into the UnitedStates, and is inflicting substantial harm on U.S. companies. It hinders the abilityof American companies to attract great talent; increases costs imposed on business;makes it more difficult for American firms to compete in the international marketplace;and gives global enterprises a new, significant incentive to build operationsandhire new employeesoutside the United States

This instability and uncertainty will make it far more difficult and expensivefor U.S. companies to hire some of the worlds best talentand impede them fromcompeting in the global marketplace. Businesses and employees have little incentiveto go through the laborious process of sponsoring or obtaining a visa, and relocatingto the United States, if an employee may be unexpectedly halted at the border.

Skilled individuals will not wish to immigrate to the country if they may becut off without warning from their spouses, grandparents, relatives, and friendsthey will not pull up roots, incur significant economic risk, and subject their family to considerable uncertainty to immigrate to the United States in the face of this instability.

The companies legal brief largely ignores the effort by Americans to win higher salaries, more secure employment and it also ignores the gains to civic cohesion from reduced social confusion and uncertainty. Instead, the brief claims there is bedrock guarantee of benefits for immigrants and employers:

Immigrants, family members, andbusinesses deserve much betterand Congress and the Constitution entitle them toan immigration system that is administered reasonably, non-arbitrarily, and in accordwith statutory requirements. The Order contravenes that bedrock guarantee.

Roughly 86 percent of people living in the United States are native-born Americans.But the legal brief also excluded ordinary Americans from their own nation, saying that the country is a nation of immigrants, not of native-born Americans.

America proudly describes itself as a nation of immigrants We are: in 1910, 14.7% of the population wasforeign born; in 2010, 12.9%.2 A quarter of us have at least one parent who wasborn outside the country. Close to half of us have a grandparent born somewhereelse. Nearly all of us trace our lineage to another country.

Each year, 4 million American youths enter the workforce to seek jobs that pay enough to afford a house and a family.

The federal governments policy of importing a huge number of legal immigrants and contract workers lowers Americans salaries by roughly $500 billion a year, according to a Harvard professor, Nearly all of $500 billion is scooped up in greater profits for companies and investors. If the worker inflow is reduced, Americans wages will rise and investors stock prices will temporarily fall, according to a June 2016 report by a stock-market firm.

ManyAmericans are unemployed or have given up looking for work. Roughly 10 percent of American prime age men, or 7 million men aged 25 to 54, have dropped out of the nations workforce, at enormous cost to themselves, their communities and to the nations economic health. Many other Americans are stuck in low-wage work in the heartland of the nation, while investors create jobs for immigrants along the two coasts.

Read the legal brief here.

The rest is here:
Silicon Valley Wants More Foreign Workers, Asks Court to Ban President's Immigration Reform - Breitbart News

President Donald Trump says those against his travel ban are putting the country in danger. About 100 technology giants, including Microsoft , Google , Facebook and Apple , have signed onto a legal action against the ban. Newslook

People protest against President Trump at the entrance to the Mar-a-Lago Resort where he is staying for the weekend on Feb. 4, 2017, in Palm Beach, Fla.(Photo: Joe Raedle, Getty Images)

SAN FRANCISCONearly three dozen more tech companies late Monday joined a court brief against President Trump's executive order on immigration, swelling the ranks of those seeking a hold on the refugee ban to 127.

Newcomers included Tesla and SpaceX, joining tech heavyweights Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft, and a list of both start-ups and more established Silicon Valley stalwarts.

The amicus brief, filed Sunday evening in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, began with 96 companies, though initial reports were 97, as one company was listed twice.

Monday afternoon those 96 mostly tech companies were joined by 31 more when an addendum was filed.

The brief lauded the drive and creativity of the USA's immigrantsand said that while protecting the nation through increased background checks was important, maintaining America's fundamental commitment to welcoming immigrants was also critical.

USA TODAY

Airbnb aims #WeAccept Super Bowl ad at refugees, immigrants

USA TODAY

Travel ban: How we got here and what is next

"The beneficiaries are not just the new immigrants who chose to come to our shores, but American businesses, workers, and consumers, who gain immense advantages from immigrants infusion of talents, energy, and opportunity," the case states.

The brief is in support of a lawsuit filed in federal court last Monday by Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson thatasked that key provisions of the executive order be declared unconstitutional.

Trump's order, signed a week after he took office, halted entry of all refugees for 120 days, banned admission of refugees from Syria indefinitely, and barred entry for three months of citizens from seven predominantly Muslim nations.

In response to that suit, Senior Judge James Robart of U.S. District Court in Seattle on Friday issued a nationwide restraining order on the immigration order.On Sunday,the 9th Circuit appeals court, considered the nation's most liberal,declined to reinstatethe restrictions.

Trump has sharply criticized the court decisions, and his Administration says the ban is necessary to weed out immigrants with intentions of terrorism. Late Monday, Justice Department officials urged the appeals court judge to reinstate the ban on grounds that not doing so endangered national security

Eventually, the Supreme Court may decide. Courts do take note of who files friends-of-the-court briefs.

Tech firms have complained that Trump's order has created havoc in an industry that is global and has a large number of foreign-born engineers in others working in the U.S. and abroad. Google has said nearly 200 of its staff would be impacted by the ban, while Microsoft said it would affect more than 75.

USA TODAY

The 127 companies on the immigration amicus brief

The list of companies that signed the amicus brief include mostly West Coast tech companies, including Adobe, Airbnb, Box, Dropbox, Etsy, Github, Glassdoor, HP Inc., Kickstarter, LinkedIn, Medium, Mozilla, Netflix, Pandora, Pinterest, Reddit, Salesforce, Slack, Square, Twilo, Yelp and Zynga.

USA TODAY

127 companies now support brief opposing Trump ban

A few non-tech companies also signed, including yogurt company Chobani, snack maker KIND and Levi Strauss & Co.

USA TODAY

Immigrants started 3 retail cos. on the court brief against the Trump order

Uber, whose CEO Travis Kalanick resigned from a Trump advisory council late last week after the ride-hailing company came under pressure from both customers and drivers, signed the brief.

SpaceX and Teslacompanies run by Elon Musk, were among the second-day additions to the list. Musk stayed on the advisory council, despite some backlash from others in the tech industry, saying it was the best chance to influence the administration to make changes to an order he has conceded treats some immigrants unfairly.

USA TODAY

Is Trump's immigration ban headed for the Supreme Court?

The brief marks one of a few recent moments in which the industry has come together around specific issues.

In 2013, more than 20 tech leaders helped create FWD.us, an organization pushing for immigration reform. In 2014, nearly 150 Internet companies sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission supporting net neutrality. And in 2016, many technology companies issued statements supporting Apple in its struggle with the FBI over breaking the encryption on an iPhone used by a terrorist in San Bernardino.

President Donald Trump used his preferred platform to criticize the judge who blocked his administration's travel ban on immigrants. Video provided by Newsy Newslook

"The Order effects a sudden shift in the rules governing entry into the United States, and is inflicting substantial harm on U.S. companies," the brief states. "It hinders the ability of American companies to attract great talent; increases costs imposed on business; makes it more difficult for American firms to compete in the international marketplace; and gives global enterprises a new, significant incentive to build operationsand hire new employeesoutside the United States."

In the filing, the companies note that immigrants or their children founded more than 200 of the Fortune 500 companies that include Apple, Kraft, Ford, General Electric, AT&T, Google, McDonalds, Boeing, and Disney. Immigrants also make up 28% of Main Street business owners and 18% of business owners nationwide as well as 16% of the U.S. labor force, they say. "Immigrants do not take jobs away from U.S. citizens they create them," the filing states.

USA TODAY

Meet James Robart, the judge who halted Trumps immigration ban

A large group of lawyers from tech companies met last Tuesday to discuss possible actions they might collectively take to fight the executive order. The amicus brief appears to be the fruit of that meeting.

There was no immediate response from the administration. On Saturday, President Trump tweeted, "I have instructed Homeland Security to check people coming into our country VERY CAREFULLY. The courts are making the job very difficult!"

Friend of the court briefs often influential

Amicus briefsallow interested parties to give the court their own take on the issues involved, without actually being a part of the case. There are few limits on who can submit them and especially contentious or important cases can have dozens arguing of briefs submitted on each side, said Martin Flaherty, a professor of constitutional law at Fordham Law School in New York City.

Its not uncommon for parties with an interest (called amici, or friends in Latin) to come together to either divvy up what their briefs will cover or work together to craft a single brief as happened in the tech groups case, Flaherty said.

While all such briefs are equal before the law, courts often take note of who is filing them.

An example Flaherty gave was a Michigan affirmative action case that went to the Supreme Court in 2003. An influential amicus filingcame from a group of retired military leaders who argued that affirmative action was crucial for the nations military academies as it would be bad for the schools and the military as a whole were the officer corps not to reflect the diversity of themilitary as a whole.

I would think that perhaps for certain justices, the fact that all these tech companies are saying this would be terrible for the country is important, Flaherty said.

Contributing: Mike Snider in Tysons Corner, Va.

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2kE0gqP

Continue reading here:
127 companies now support brief opposing Trump ban - USA TODAY

Editors note: This article was originally published April 8, 2014

That, in essence, is what some political leaders have for any chance of comprehensive immigration plan to pass soon in this country.

Among those leaders with hope is San Antonio mayor Julin Castro and former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour. Both spoke on the panel Pathway to the American Dream: Immigration Policy in the 21st Century during the first day of the Civil Rights Summit at the LBJ Presidential Library. The two agreed on pretty much every point covered and often complemented one other. It left many of us to wonder why more politicians from opposing parties cant work together so gracefully on this particular topic.

Both Castro, a Democrat, and Barbour, a Republican, say comprehensive immigration reform is needed. The right reform, they agree, would find a solution for the more than 11 million undocumented immigrants deportation, not being a part of the solution.

The panel set out to talk about two types of immigration: legal vs. illegal. Castro agreed that there are distinction, but clarified that a potential large percentage anywhere from 15 percent to 45 percent of the 11 million immigrants cited have entered with a valid visa and just stayed, also known as over-stayers.

When we talk about border security, I hope people also talk about those people with visas who overstayed, said Barbour.

This segment of the undocumented immigrants is not talked about much because, Castro said, over-stayers arent as scary a thought as those who illegally cross the border.

That makes sense. For many, working immigrants have been unjustly stereotyped as criminals and violent people.

Barbour said, Americans want a safe border and theyre willing to pay for it.

However, throwing more money into border security and more boots on the ground wont make it more secure. And the panelists agreed.

It accounts for something that weve paid so much on border security and weve yet to figure out what that really means.

One of the first steps to securing the border is to set a standard by which to measure security, Castro said. Border crossings will never be at zero.

A heckler, who identified herself as a DREAMER, pointed out that the panel hadnt mentioned anything on deportation. And though they didnt immediately address the topic, the panelists agreed that deportation was not a viable solution to the immigration problem.

Anyone who thinks we are going to send back 11 million people, if they tell you that, theyll lie to you about other things, said Barbour. Thats just not going to happen.

So what can be done to solve the problem?

Both panelists agreed that crafting a law that takes into account the contributions made by millions of undocumented individuals and find a way to assure they earn citizenship is essential. Its just not practical to send them back.

After the summit Castro talked to me about the issue of deportation.

I asked him, while Americans wait for reform to pass, what should be done about the thousands of deportations that happen on a monthly basis across the nation.

My hope is that regardless of whether or not a reform happens in this calendar year, that the administration will find ways to alleviate deportations for people with families and for those who dont have serious criminal record, he said.

That is exactly what many local activists have been pushing for.

But that definition for a secured border nor a comprehensive reform can not come if republicans dont set politics aside and focus instead on a policy that works for the United States, said Barbour.

Both Castro and Barbour believe it will happen, if not this year, most certainly by election year 2016.

Lets hope it comes sooner than later.

More:
LBJ Civil Rights Summit: Long road ahead for immigration reform - Austin American-Statesman

NorthJersey Published 12:09 a.m. ET Feb. 5, 2017 | Updated 7 hours ago

Chris Christie(Photo: Julio Cortez/AP)

What a difference nine years make. In 2008, U.S. Attorney Chris Christie said immigrants living in the United Sates without valid documentation were not in violation of the U.S. criminal code.

In 2013, when running for a second term as governor, Christie supported a bill allowing undocumented college-age immigrants who were brought into the United States as children so-called Dreamers to attend state colleges and universities at in-state tuition rates. He signed the bill into law.

But in 2017, Governor Christie is really willing to partner with President Donald Trump in punishing municipalities that proclaim a willingness to aid undocumented people.

The governor said that on Fox News Channels OReilly Factor Thursday night. Christie has been making the rounds of talk shows of late, perhaps a sign that he is looking to once again raise his national profile as the Trump administration stumbles in its first weeks.

Back in 2008, Christie was a gubernatorial hopeful and was pitching himself as a pragmatic Republican, someone who would govern a blue state with an even hand. Christie made a nuanced distinction between a violation of criminal law and a civil law. There are differences, from a legal perspective, between crossing the border illegally and entering legally but then overstaying a visa.

But to many Americans in 2017, this is a moot point. Trump campaigned heavily on building a wall on the U.S.-Mexican border, instituting some form or Muslim immigration ban and cracking down on so-called sanctuary cities.

What makes a municipality a sanctuary city is not well defined. Some city councils pass ordinances declaring an intention to not enforce federal immigration policy. Other cities just do not want to be forced into dealing with federal immigration policy. Many police departments rightly believe if they are forced to act as federal immigration agents, they compromise their relationships in the very communities federal officials need willing partners.

There was a time Christie understood this completely. Federal officials in New Jersey in the months following 9/11 built bridges. Now the Trump administration and a willing Christie want walls.

Writing today in the Sunday Opinion section about Trumps refugee ban, Newark Cardinal Joseph Tobin says, Scripture impels my brother bishops and I to call on the federal government to alter its executive actions, and instead craft a well-conceived and comprehensive approach to immigration and refugee resettlement reform that both protects our people and national security and treats newcomers and refugees with respect, mercy, love and kindness.

That approach has to also apply to how the federal government deals with the 11 million undocumented people living in the United States. Rather than punish cities, the Trump administration should be focused on how to reform U.S. immigration policies and forge a legislative compromise in Congress that separates individuals who should be deported from the millions of people who are contributing to U.S. society and need to be taken out of the shadows.

It is not an easy task. And it is one where Christie could play an important part on the national stage as a former U.S. attorney and a governor of a diverse state. It just depends on which Christie shows up the one from 2008 or 2017.

Read or Share this story: http://northjersy.news/2k8ZKhc

Go here to see the original:
Editorial: There are two Christies on immigration reform - NorthJersey.com

When President Trump ordered a vastoverhaul of immigration law enforcement during his first week in office, he strippedaway most restrictions on who should be deported, opening the door for roundups and detentionson a scale not seen in nearly a decade.

Up to 8 million people in the country illegally could be considered priorities for deportation, according tocalculations by the Los Angeles Times. Theywere based on interviews withexperts who studied the orderand two internal documents that signal immigration officials are taking an expansive view of Trumps directive.

Far fromtargeting only bad hombres, as Trump has said repeatedly, his new order allows immigration agents to detain nearly anyone they come in contact with who has crossed the border illegally. People could be booked into custody forusing food stamps or if their child receives free school lunches.

The deportation targets are a much larger group than those swept up inthe travel bans that sowed chaos at airports and seized public attention over the past week. Fewer than 1 million people came to the U.S. over the past decade from the seven countries from whichmostvisitors are temporarily blocked.

Deportations of this scale, which hasnot been publicly totaled before, could have widely felt consequences: Families would be separated. Businesses catering to immigrant customers may be shuttered. Crops could be left to rot, unpicked, as agricultural and other industries that rely on immigrant workforcesface labor shortages. U.S. relations could be strained with countries that stand to receive an influx of deported people, particularly in Latin America. Even the Social Security system, which many immigrants working illegallypay into under fake identification numbers, would take a hit.

The new instructions represent a wide expansion of President Obamas focus on deporting only recent arrivals, repeat immigration violators and people with multiple criminal violations. Under the Obama administration, only about 1.4 million people were considered priorities for removal.

We are going back to enforcement chaos they are going to give lip service to going after criminals, but they really are going to round up everybody they can get their hands on, saidDavid Leopold, a former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Assn. andan immigration lawyer for more thantwo decades.

Trump's orders instruct officers to deport not only those convicted of crimes, but also those who arent charged but are believed to have committed "acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense."

That category appliestothe 6 million people believed to have entered the U.S. without passing through an official border crossing. The rest of the 11.1 million people in the country illegally,according to a study by the Pew Research Center, are believed to have entered on a valid visa and stayed past its expiration date.

Also among those 11.1 million are about 8 million jobholders, Pew found. The vast majorityhave worked in violation of the law by stating on federal employment forms that they were legally allowed to work. Trumps order calls for targeting anyone wholied on the forms.

Trumpsdeportationpriorities also include smaller groups whose totals remain elusive:people in the country illegally who are charged with crimes that have not yet been adjudicated andthose who receive an improper welfare benefit, used a fake identity card, were found driving without a license orreceived federal food assistance.

An additional executive order under consideration would block entry to anyone the U.S. believes may use benefit programs such as Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program, according two Trump administration officials who have seen the draft order.

The changes reflect an effortto deter illegal migrationby increasing the threat of deportation and cutting off access to social services and work opportunities, an approach that2012 Republican presidential nomineeMitt Romney called self-deportation.

The White House insisted that it is intent onrooting out those who endanger Americans.Trump aidespointedto 124 people who were released from immigration custody from 2010 to 2015 who went on to be charged with murder, according to immigration data provided to Congress by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Its not that 6 million people are priorities for removal, it is the dangerous criminals hiding among those millions who are no longer able to hide, said a White House official who would not be named describing internal policy debates.

Weve gone from a situation where ICEofficers have no discretion to enhance public safety and their hands are totally tied, to allowing ICE officers to engage in preventative policing and to go after known public safety threats and stop terrible crimes from happening.

The changes, some of which have already begun with more expected in the coming months, set the stage for sweeping deportations last seen in the final years of the George W. Bush administration.Factories and meatpacking plants were raidedafter talks with Congress overcomprehensive immigration reform broke down in 2007.

After Obama took office, hisadministration stopped thoseworksite raidsand restricted deportation priorities. Expulsions of people settled and working in the U.S. fell more than 70% from 2009 to 2016.

That era has come to an end.

For too long, your officers and agents haven't been allowed to properly do their jobs, Trump told uniformed Border Patrol agents and immigration officers just after signingthe order.

Although immigration agents will want to go after criminals and people who pose national security risks, Trumps order gives them leeway and marks a return to traditional enforcement, said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that advocates for restrictions on immigration.

Almost everyone who is here illegally could potentially be considered a priority, Vaughan said.

Just how many people are swept up will depend on new instructions being drafted for immigration agents that will be rolled out over the next several months. But already, signs point to immigration officials embracing Trumps order.

In late January, Trumpsimmigration policy experts gave a 20-page document to top Homeland Security officialsthat lays out how to ramp up immigration enforcement, according to two people familiar with the memo. A list of steps included nearly doubling the number of people held in immigration detention to 80,000 per day, as well as clamping down on programs that allow people to leave immigration custody and check in with federal agents or wear an ankle monitor while their cases play out in immigration court.

The instructions also propose allowing Border Patrol agents to provide translation assistance to local law enforcement, a practice that was stopped in 2012 over concerns that it was contributing to racial profiling.

In addition, Homeland Security officials have circulated an 11-page memo on how to enact Trumps order. Among other steps, that document suggests expanding the use of a deportation process that bypasses immigration courts and allows officers to expel foreigners immediately upon capture. The process, called expedited removal,now applies only to immigrants who arearrestedwithin 100 miles of the border and within two weeks of illegally crossing over and who dont express a credible fear of persecution back home. The program could be expanded farther from the border and target those who have lived in the U.S. illegally for up to twoyears.

By giving more authority to immigration officers, Trump has put his administration on track to boost deportations more than 75% in his first full year in office. That would meet the level set in 2012, at the end of Obamas first term, when more than 400,000 people were deported. It dropped to some 235,000 last year after illegal immigration fell andagents were given narrowed deportation targets.

In addition, Trump plans to empower local police to work with immigration agents to identify people they believe live illegally in their cities and towns, particularly those seen as violent, the White House official said, comparingthe arrestofa suspected gang leader on an immigration violation to the FBI charging a mafia leader with tax evasion.

The great thing about immigration law is it is a preventative law enforcement tool, theofficial said.

Plans are in the works to expand a program that provides training for local cops on how to enforce immigration laws. Theapproach is similar to Arizonaspapers, please law that was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2012 on the grounds that the state was trying to enforce federal immigration laws. Civil liberties advocates warn that such programs risk targeting people for their appearance and could lead to rampant violations of search and seizure rights.

Elizabeth Ford, an immigration lawyer in Chardon, Ohio,near Cleveland, said she has already seen immigration officers detain migrants in the country illegally who have been charged with crimes but not convicted, even when those charges were later dropped.

Before Trump was even sworn in, immigration agents began detaining people as they left court, she said; agents previously only showed up after a conviction.

In addition, far fewer clients making asylum claims are being released while those claims are heard, she said, a stark change from just a few months ago.

It will get even more aggressive, she predicted.

Indeed, though Trump has backed off his campaign call to deport all 11.1 million people estimated to bein the country illegally, he is already facing pressure from his base to go beyond his executive order andend Obamas programthat has awardedwork permits to more than 750,000 people brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

At Fridays White House briefing, Press Secretary Sean Spicer was asked when the program would be ended and permits would stop being issued.

We've made it very clear that we'll have further updates on immigration, Spicer said, though he did not give an update on the status of the work permits program. ...The president has made significant progress on addressing the pledge that he made to the American people regarding immigration problems that we face, and I think we're going tosee more action on that in the next few weeks.

Twitter: @ByBrianBennett

brian.bennett@latimes.com

ALSO:

U.S. authorities end enforcement of travel ban after judge puts Trump executive order on hold

When Trump says he wants to deport criminals, he means something starkly different than Obama

Aid groups see Trumps travel restrictions as 'a huge step backwards'

See the original post:
Not just 'bad hombres': Trump is targeting up to 8 million people for deportation - Los Angeles Times