Week of October 29–31, 2024

Although immigration law is federally governed, state laws and local enforcement play a critical role in driving immigration enforcement. Since the launch of the ‘Secure Communities’ program, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is automatically notified whenever someone is arrested, regardless of the reason. This gives local law enforcement significant influence over deportation actions, with 70-75% of ICE arrests in the U.S. coming from state and local agencies.

If Donald Trump is re-elected, his administration may use federal resources for deportation raids, targeting immigrant communities, especially in sanctuary cities. However, most people deported will still be handed over by local law enforcement. States like Texas have strengthened this system by incorporating immigration enforcement into their criminal legal systems, and other states have followed suit with harsh anti-immigrant laws.

On the flip side, some states, like Oregon and Illinois, have implemented laws that limit local cooperation with ICE. Most "blue" states, however, lack meaningful safeguards against aggressive federal enforcement. Despite these challenges, states with protective laws benefit 23 million immigrants, compared to 15 million in harmful states.

Local involvement in immigration enforcement damages immigrant communities, eroding trust in law enforcement and disrupting lives. While sanctuary policies help protect immigrant communities, many states are expanding cooperation with ICE, requiring further action to safeguard residents. The ILRC continues to support efforts to protect immigrant rights through local and national advocacy for sanctuary laws.

Immigration is a key issue in the 2024 U.S. election, with presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump both advocating for asylum reforms and stronger border security, though they disagree on immigration policy and its economic impact. Research shows that immigration strengthens the U.S. economy. Immigrants, who make up nearly 15% of the U.S. population, generated $1.6 trillion in economic activity in 2022 and paid over $579 billion in taxes. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that increased immigration could reduce the federal deficit by $897 billion over the next decade.

Undocumented immigration remains controversial, with some arguing it strains state and local budgets. However, others argue that factors like housing shortages and zoning laws play a larger role in housing crises, rather than immigration alone. Most economists believe immigration boosts the economy by increasing the labor force, tax revenue, and consumer demand, though some raise concerns about its impact on low-wage jobs.

Immigrants, who make up nearly 19% of the U.S. civilian workforce, are employed in various sectors, especially service, construction, and transportation. Many work as gig workers or in informal jobs. Immigrants also play a significant role in entrepreneurship, founding over 55% of U.S. start-ups valued at $1 billion or more. Despite representing 16% of U.S. inventors, immigrants produced 23% of patents from 1990-2016.

Immigration reform has been a longstanding issue, with both Republicans and Democrats struggling to reach a solution. This challenge is highlighted in the upcoming election, fueled by former President Trump’s comments about Vice President Harris’ role and ongoing debates over border security. Immigration is increasingly politicized, with candidates focusing on securing the southern border rather than addressing the root causes of migration.

Veronica Tobar Thronson, director of Michigan State University's Immigration Law Clinic, explains that the lack of reform stems from a complex system and insufficient political will. Immigration laws have become more restrictive since the last major reform in 1996, and enforcement has shifted to border security and detention. With over 3.7 million pending immigration cases, the system is overwhelmed and underfunded.

Politicians often demonize immigrants, perpetuating misinformation about their contributions and status. This rhetoric fuels fear, particularly among immigrant communities, and leads to increased attacks. The election outcome could have significant implications, as millions of naturalized citizens are eligible to vote.

Thronson suggests that small reforms, such as the "Parole in Place" program for undocumented spouses of U.S. citizens, could help. However, political opposition has blocked such measures. A key solution would be eliminating the three- and ten-year bars, which prevent people from adjusting their status and force them to leave the country. These changes could benefit thousands of individuals seeking lawful status through family or employment ties.

Japan is facing a severe population crisis, with a declining population and an aging workforce. From a peak of 128 million in 2008, Japan's population has steadily decreased, and its working-age population is expected to shrink by 19 million by 2050. The low fertility rate of 1.3 children per woman is well below the replacement level, and the aging population has led to higher social security and healthcare costs, burdening the economy.

In response, Japan has introduced policies to increase births and attract foreign workers, including "baby bonuses" and relaxed immigration laws. The government has also increased efforts to recruit foreign workers, particularly in industries facing labor shortages, such as healthcare and construction. Programs like the Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) and High Skilled Foreign Professionals (HSFP) offer pathways for immigrants to fill key roles.

Despite these efforts, Japan’s immigration policies have historically been restrictive. For decades, immigration was limited to high-skilled workers or those of Japanese descent. Foreign workers, particularly low-skilled ones, were often exploited through programs like the Technical Intern Training Program (TITP), which had poor working conditions and limited rights.

Although immigration is increasing, Japan still lacks sufficient support for newcomers, particularly in language training and cultural integration. Immigrants face challenges such as discrimination, difficulty securing long-term residency, and negative assimilation in the workforce, earning less than their Japanese counterparts. To resolve these issues, Japan must improve its support systems, enabling immigrants to better integrate, thrive economically, and help address the country’s labor shortages.

Immigration lawyers often face frustrating decisions from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), such as a recent case where USCIS denied an I-130 petition based on a marriage fraud finding. In response, I advised the attorney to consider federal litigation, citing our successful challenge in Bristow v. USCIS, where the Northern District of Illinois ruled that USCIS failed to present clear and convincing evidence to support its marriage fraud decision.

In another case, Senior U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman rejected USCIS’s fabricated “path of funds” requirement for EB-5 immigrant investor petitions, demonstrating that agency policies can be challenged successfully in court.

These cases highlight the shifting nature of immigration law, compounded by USCIS processing delays. Clients often think their attorneys aren’t doing enough, but litigation can be a powerful tool. With institutional biases within agencies like the Board of Immigration Appeals and the Administrative Appeals Office, taking a case to an independent, lifetime-appointed federal judge can yield better results. The recent Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright v. Raimondo reinforces the need for courts to limit agency discretion, which may benefit future immigration litigation.

For lawyers, there has never been a better time to challenge USCIS denials and delays in U.S. district courts. I co-chaired an AILA online course to help attorneys enhance their litigation skills. This course covers a range of immigration issues and is ideal for both beginners and experienced litigators who want to expand their federal litigation expertise.

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798, part of the Alien and Sedition Acts, allows the president to detain, restrain, and remove noncitizens during a "declared war" or in the event of an "invasion." Although the law has mostly been used in wartime, Donald Trump has threatened to use it to justify mass deportations, including targeting immigrants from countries he labels as threats. This law has a troubling history, such as being used during World War II to intern Japanese Americans, and has long been associated with racial prejudice.

Trump’s rhetoric around an “invasion” of immigrants from Mexico has fueled fears that he might use the Act to deport millions, including lawful permanent residents and U.S. citizens of Mexican descent. This could lead to widespread racial profiling, wrongful detentions, and civil liberties violations. The law’s vague language and lack of due process protections make it ripe for abuse, with little judicial oversight or hearings required before deportation.

The ACLU warns that such actions would have devastating consequences for immigrant communities, calling on local and state leaders to resist federal deportation efforts. Without support from state and local agencies, Trump’s administration would face significant challenges in carrying out mass deportations. The ACLU, alongside its members, is committed to protecting immigrants and ensuring such violations never take root in U.S. communities.

Rick Roth, a Florida Republican legislator and farmer, spent decades opposing legislation that would require employers to verify the immigration status of their workers. However, by 2023, his stance changed. Despite his long reliance on undocumented immigrant labor for his farm in Palm Beach County, Roth supported a controversial bill (SB 1718) targeting illegal immigration. The bill required most employers to check new hires’ immigration status, mandated hospitals to ask about patients’ status, and funded measures to transport undocumented immigrants out of Florida. Roth justified his support with claims of an "invasion" at the border, aligning with Republican talking points.

The bill passed easily, but Roth soon faced backlash from constituents, particularly farmers and contractors who feared the law would cripple their businesses. Workers, fearing a crackdown, began fleeing the state in large numbers, leaving employers in crisis. Roth’s office was flooded with complaints, including from a nursery owner who asked, “What have you done?”

Meanwhile, in Mexico, Salvador Garcia Espitia and his wife, Nohemí Enriquez Fonseca, struggled with the challenges of raising a child with disabilities while working low-wage jobs. As the couple faced their own hardships, Roth’s legislation caused ripple effects that not only threatened Florida’s agriculture economy but also impacted families like Garcia’s, who depended on the labor market Roth’s bill jeopardized.

The dehumanization of immigrants by Republican politicians, especially through harsh rhetoric, has become a disturbing norm in political discourse. Leaders like Donald Trump and his allies often use dehumanizing language, promoting fear to secure votes. The media amplifies this rhetoric, furthering anti-immigrant sentiment. While politicians may gain from stoking fear, the actions of Republican judges are harder to understand. These judges, unlike politicians, don’t need to rely on fear to retain power, yet they still dehumanize immigrants, suggesting cruelty is their primary motivation.

A recent example is a ruling by Trump-appointed judge Trevor McFadden, who allowed a lawsuit by Arizona ranchers against the Biden administration. The ranchers claim that reversing Trump’s border policies caused environmental harm by increasing the number of immigrants on their land. One of the plaintiffs, Steven Smith, argued that migrants damaged water supplies for his cattle, claiming they were stealing water by tampering with troughs. McFadden's opinion frames this as a significant harm, ignoring the reality that migrants often cross deserts in desperate need of water.

This ruling illustrates how immigrants are viewed as lesser beings. The ranchers' cattle are prioritized over human lives, with McFadden's decision suggesting that the cows' access to water should take precedence. This case highlights the moral issue of immigration, not an environmental one. The way society responds to the needs of immigrants tests our humanity—and Trump, his supporters, and judges like McFadden have failed this test.

Mary Howard-Elley, a retired TSA agent, was mistakenly flagged as a noncitizen by Montgomery County, Texas, after a jury duty summons. The county claimed she indicated she was not a U.S. citizen, but Howard-Elley disputes this, stating she only requested an exemption due to her guardianship duties. She was given 30 days to provide proof of citizenship, which she did by submitting her certified birth certificate. However, her voter registration was not reinstated, and she was mistakenly removed from the rolls.

Howard-Elley’s case highlights errors in Texas’ efforts to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls, which have been widely criticized. While Governor Greg Abbott’s claims of mass noncitizen voting have been debunked, Howard-Elley’s experience underscores the risks of such initiatives. Despite submitting her birth certificate, her registration remained canceled until news organizations intervened, showing that state law mandates the immediate reinstatement of voters whose registration was wrongly canceled.

After presenting proof of citizenship again, Howard-Elley was reinstated, just in time for the upcoming election. She expressed frustration with the system but was relieved to regain her voting rights, which she had held for over 30 years. Her case reveals the challenges many eligible voters face in securing their right to vote, especially when they lack the resources or persistence to contest errors.

Kamala Harris recently delivered a “closing argument” for her presidential campaign, emphasizing that immigration should not be used to scare voters. She criticized Donald Trump’s mass deportation plans but proposed measures that continue many of the same harsh policies. Harris pledged to work on a border security bill supported by both parties, claiming it would strengthen the border and help curb fentanyl smuggling.

With the election approaching, immigration remains a top concern for many voters, especially Trump supporters, 82% of whom rate it as a crucial issue. However, only 14% of Harris supporters prioritize it. Harris has faced criticism from the left for her administration’s continued support for Trump-era policies, such as the expansion of the US-Mexico border wall and restrictions on asylum seekers. Under Biden, deportations have surged, while asylum claims have been limited, including a controversial asylum ban for migrants crossing the southern border.

Both Biden and Harris have been accused of perpetuating the causes of mass migration, such as US-backed destabilization in Latin American countries. US sanctions on Venezuela and Cuba have worsened economic conditions, leading to increased migration. Despite this, neither candidate has proposed addressing the root causes of migration, which many experts believe lie in US foreign policy. This has led to continued criticism of the Democratic Party’s handling of immigration, which mirrors many of the same approaches taken by Trump.

During an Oct. 12 rally in Aurora, Colorado, former President Donald Trump condemned illegal immigration, claiming Vice President Kamala Harris had brought “illegal alien gang members” and criminals into the U.S. Trump’s aggressive rhetoric on immigration echoes the policies of his first term, which immigration attorneys and activists fear will intensify under a potential second term.

Trump’s first presidency brought chaos and fear to immigrant communities, marked by a reduction in asylum seekers, a historic low in refugee admissions, and mass deportation rhetoric. While ICE arrests and deportations were lower than under Obama, Trump's policies fostered an environment where immigrants feared deportation even when applying for legal status. His administration also made it harder for immigrants to access legal services due to bureaucratic hurdles.

As Trump gears up for a second run, immigrant advocates in Connecticut, such as those at IRIS and Unidad Latina en Acción, are preparing for intensified policies, including mass raids and stricter local enforcement collaboration. Advocates are focusing on raising awareness of immigrants’ rights and countering misinformation.

Despite concerns, activists remain committed to immigration reform. They emphasize that immigrants play a vital role in the economy and that New Haven’s immigrant community isn’t going anywhere, even under the threat of harsh policies. The focus is on staying coordinated and ensuring immigrant communities know their rights in the face of potentially worsening conditions.

Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) recently claimed that illegal immigration is bankrupting rural hospitals, citing the strain caused by providing care to those without legal status. In his response at a rally in Wisconsin, he argued that hospitals are forced to provide services to immigrants who cannot pay, contributing to closures. Vance's statement is tied to the fact that more than 150 rural hospitals have closed since 2010, often due to financial struggles, including treating uninsured patients.

Experts, however, dispute Vance’s claim. They emphasize that rural hospitals face multiple stressors, such as low patient volumes, high rates of Medicare and Medicaid patients, and the financial challenges tied to these insurance programs, which often pay less than private insurers. Moreover, Medicare is considered one of the better payers for rural hospitals. The rise of Medicare Advantage plans has also introduced additional financial strain, but experts argue that it’s not solely the issue of uninsured immigrants causing closures.

While some states have expanded coverage for immigrants, including low-income individuals without legal status, this isn’t the only factor contributing to hospital closures. Experts agree that the financial decline of rural hospitals is a gradual process, often taking years to culminate in closure. Therefore, Vance's assertion that immigrant care is directly leading to bankruptcies is inaccurate. We rate his statement as False.

A Mauritanian illegal immigrant, Sidi Mohamed Abdallahi, has been charged with shooting a Jewish man in Chicago’s West Rogers Park neighborhood. Abdallahi, who was released into the U.S. in 2023 after being apprehended by Border Patrol, allegedly attacked the 39-year-old victim, who was wearing traditional Jewish clothing, on his way to a synagogue. Police quickly identified Abdallahi, and after he shot at responding officers, they returned fire, injuring him. Abdallahi was arrested and charged with 14 felonies, including attempted murder.

Mauritania, a majority Muslim country, is considered a security concern by the Department of Homeland Security, and illegal immigrants from the country undergo additional vetting. Despite this, local "sanctuary" policies in Cook County have hindered federal cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) regarding Abdallahi’s detainer request.

Jewish leaders believe the shooting may have been a hate crime, but no charges have been filed yet. The case highlights growing concerns over the influx of migrants from Mauritania, which has increased significantly in recent years. A report in August revealed that many illegal immigrants on terrorist watchlists were released into the U.S., adding to concerns over national security risks at the southern border. The U.S. has seen a notable rise in the number of migrants from high-risk countries, with a large number of individuals crossing the border undetected.

Immigration restrictions nearly prevented Elon Musk from making his major contributions to economic innovation, and they continue to block other potential innovators. Musk, once working illegally in the U.S., was almost deported. He managed to stay due to law enforcement either being unaware of or ignoring his status. Though much of the focus has been on Musk's hypocrisy—advocating for stricter immigration policies that could have deported him—his story highlights the damage caused by immigration restrictions.

Cato Institute expert Alex Nowrasteh argues that the U.S. immigration system nearly prevented Musk from building his companies, like Tesla and SpaceX, which have revolutionized industries. His experience shows how restrictive policies could stop future innovators. While Musk was a brilliant entrepreneur, he wasn’t guaranteed success when he first arrived. If he had been deported, the world might not have seen his contributions.

Immigrants, including Musk, contribute disproportionately to entrepreneurial and scientific breakthroughs. Large-scale immigration restrictions block many potential innovators, and by keeping out ordinary migrants, we also lose exceptional contributions. Even though a small fraction of immigrants become major innovators, their impact is immense.

While Musk’s influence on political discourse—such as promoting conspiracy theories—raises concerns, his entrepreneurial innovations have likely had a greater positive impact. The real issue is not whether immigrants can spread harmful political ideas, but how we empower government to restrict migrants based on potential harm. Musk's story serves as a reminder of the value of more open immigration policies.

A 36-year-old Mexican man, Jose Manuel Sanchez-Castro, died Sunday at the Northwest ICE Processing Center (NWIPC) in Tacoma, a privately-operated detention facility. He was in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody at the time of his death, which is under investigation with an autopsy pending. Sanchez-Castro, who had been arrested multiple times for unlawful reentry and convictions for illegal reentry and drug-related offenses, reportedly experienced fentanyl withdrawal before his death. A 911 call revealed that he was found unresponsive in a medical unit and had vomited.

Sanchez-Castro was first detained in 2009 and had been arrested several times since, including for resisting arrest and drug charges. ICE confirmed that detainees receive medical screenings and assessments upon arrival and are provided emergency care when needed. However, it remains unclear when he arrived at NWIPC.

Tacoma Fire Department responded to the facility on Sunday morning, but radio signals indicated that Sanchez-Castro had died shortly after. His death marks the second fatality at the NWIPC this year and the fourth since its opening in 2004. The facility, one of ICE’s largest in the nation, is run by the GEO Group, a private contractor with a significant presence in correctional services worldwide.