Ricardo Levins-Morales was returning home on May 14, exhausted from a long trip and eager to get home. On the Blue Line train from the airport, he saw an MTC officer interrogating a fellow passenger. He recalls thinking that “maybe this wasn’t going to be routine,” aware of “how quickly and easily police interactions can escalate.” So he fumbled in his backpack for his phone, turned it on and started filming.

Levins-Morales called out the officer on his questions about immigration status. The officer seemed to back down as a result of his question. Then the train arrived at 38th Street, and everyone had to get off and take a bus, because of weekend work on the line. In the confusion, Levins-Morales lost sight of the young man. He saw one on the two transit officers, now by himself, and “made the mistake of assuming that the young man had gotten free.”

Later in the week, he posted the video, which has gone viral, with millions of views around the world. That led to an investigation by the Pioneer Press, revealing that the Ariel Vences-Lopez had not gotten free, but had been tasered, arrested, and turned over to ICE to be deported.

Though the video did not get Vences-Lopez free, it had far-reaching impact.

“I’ve gotten people responding to me on Facebook, saying, ‘Now I know what to do in a situation like that,” Levins-Morales says. “It’s important that the impulse be to intervene to try to shift the balance of power at the moment, but there’s no template for what’s right in any given moment.

“When I spoke up, the cop first looked at my face and then glanced down and saw the phone — I’m sure that made a difference in his response. So if my phone wasn’t working or had bene out of charge, even that would have helped to give a little more leverage in the moment to try to interrupt what was going on.

“It’s not the tools that are important — it’s the understanding that you need to quickly reach for an appropriate tool, and that might change, depending on circumstances.”

The video also led to action from the Met Council and MTC. As an internal investigation began, the police officer resigned his MTC job. MTC police chief John Harrington strongly reiterated MTC policy against any questions about immigration status.

 

For more of the story, read Cell phone video caught MTC officer asking immigration status – the rest of the story still unfolding

 

The Ninth Circuit ruling gave an additional rationale for finding the travel ban illegitimate: it violates the Immigration and Nationality Act prohibition against discrimination on the basis of nationality, which meant Trump “exceeded the scope of the authority delegated to him by Congress.”

The unanimous ruling also allows the Trump administration to proceed with internal studies of security measures — which gives the Supreme Court even less reason to expedite its own consideration of the case, or to stay the 4th and 9th Circuit rulings.

“But history may record this term as a blockbuster in one area that has become eerily relevant to America in 2017: how much due process is owed to immigrants, undocumented aliens, aliens outside the United States—and even naturalized citizens. In this area, no fewer than eight cases remain to be announced. The Court granted review in most of them before the election, when they seemed legally important but not overwhelmingly so. But in the surreal post-election era of Donald Trump—the era of the deportation force, mass immigrant roundups, expanding detention of allegedly unlawful immigrants, and hypertrophy of the Department of Homeland Security’s already overgrown enforcement apparatus–they may, together, become literal matters of life and death.  “

Advocates including the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota (ILCM) are fighting back against the Department of Justice (DOJ) attempt to limit immigrant access to non-profit legal assistance. In April, the DOJ sent a warning letter to the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project (NWIRP) in Seattle, telling the organization to “cease and desist” from assisting immigrants in deportation proceedings unless NWIRP has entered a formal notice of representation with the immigration court.

A brief in support of NWIRP (called an “amicus brief”) was submitted by more than a dozen legal assistance organizations, including ILCM. The amicus brief describes why immigrants need advice and assistance even if lawyers cannot commit to full representation:

“A day in any immigration court in America would be an enlightening experience for most U.S. citizens, including for much of the bar. Respondent after respondent pleads for a continuance to find a lawyer. Shackled detainees ask anyone in a suit for a card. Detainees who have run out of continuances stare blankly at an overworked judge who asks the most basic questions, or they ask for help understanding a form, or they unknowingly provide incomplete responses that seal their fate.”

Immigration courts have no public defenders. Immigrants in deportation proceedings have lawyers only if they can afford them. Non-profit organizations offer some help, but they do not have enough capacity to represent everyone. Even if immigrants have money, they often cannot find a qualified immigration attorney, especially in detention centers that are far from major cities.

In its cease and desist letter to NWIRP, DOJ objected to a situation in which an attorney from NWIRP helped with a motion to reopen drafted on behalf of a woman and her two children. NWIRP did not have an attorney available to take the case for representation, which would take hundreds of hours, and so the attorney instead offered advice and limited help in drafting the motion. The attorney noted this assistance on the court documents. And the woman desperately needed help: she spoke Mam (a Mayan language), waited for months for a credible-fear interview that never happened, and then missed her hearing because of a mistranslation of her hearing notice.

Because full representation on an immigration case is enormously time-consuming, NWIRP, ILCM, and other non-profit legal organizations often provide advice and education, multiplying their effectiveness and assisting many more people than can be helped through representation alone. As noted in the amicus brief,

“Some amici organize workshops to teach general immigration concepts to immigrants or attorneys; some help answer questions on forms such as the I-589 asylum application; some provide templates for petitions, motions, and briefs; and some help draft documents that a pro se litigant will file in immigration court.”

While this assistance is not as helpful as full representation, the amicus brief noted that “the ideal that all persons in immigration proceedings have full-scope legal representation is a far cry from reality.”

These strategies for delivering help to as many immigrants as possible are exactly what the Trump DOJ’s cease-and-desist letter threaten. The interpretation that DOJ sets forth in its letter could prevent tens of thousands of immigrants from getting individualized legal advice and assistance.

Immigration court judges know that this assistance is valuable. The amicus brief quoted former Immigration Judge Eliza Klein:

“Without the assistance of these non-profit organizations, there is a real danger that people with valid asylum claims will not seek relief or may not present their claim in such a way that the judge will understand the validity of the claim. Even when they are able to present their case, if they have had no prior assistance in filling out forms, writing statements and obtaining supporting evidence, the amount of time the court must dedicate to the case (both in questioning the Respondent about unexplored avenues of relevant information and in continuing a case to obtain evidence) is greatly increased. In essence, by preventing these organizations from assisting asylum seekers in preparing their applications, EOIR would deprive asylum applicants of the “full and fair hearing” to which they are entitled.”

Federal District Court Judge Richard Jones (Seattle) found that NWIRP “is likely to succeed on the claims that entitle it to relief,” and that granting a temporary restraining order “is in the public interest.” He issued a nationwide temporary restraining order against the Department of Justice on May 17, ordering that the DOJ not attempt to enforce the cease-and-desist letter against NWIRP, or against any non-profit organizations that provide legal services, while the court considers NWIRP’s request for a preliminary injunction.

 

For more information, see:

• The Airport Lawyers Who Stood Up to Trump Are Under Attack (The Nation,5/19/17)
• Seattle Judge Rules Justice Department Can’t Limit Legal Assistance to Immigrants (YES! Magazine, 5/18/17)
• Federal Judge Blocks Restriction on Immigrant Legal Help (Honolulu Star Advertiser, 5/17/17)
• Mtn. for Leave to File Amicus (Ex. A – Proposed Amicus Brief w Exhibits)…
• NWIRP Cease and Desist 4-5-17
• 2017-05-17 Order Granting TRO
• NWIRP challenges order from Department o fJustice to cease and desist providing legal assistance to unrepresented individuals in deportation proceedings (NWIRP)

Minneapolis artist Ricardo Levins Morales filmed a Metro Transit officer interrogating someone on a Blue Line train – asking him “Are you here legally?” Immigration enforcement is not an assignment for Metro Transit officers, and Levins Morales challenged him. After the video was posted to Facebook, Metro Transit police chief John Harrington said he “called for an Internal Affairs investigation to gather the details about this incident and to report back to me as quickly as possible.”

You’ve heard it many times, maybe even said it – why don’t they just get in line? Minnesota has an estimated 90,000 – 100,000 undocumented immigrants, many of them living here for five, ten, twenty years, raising families, working, paying taxes – why don’t they just get in line? The answer is pretty simple: for most people, there is no line.

Immigrants make up 13.5 percent of the national population but only 8.3 percent of Minnesota’s population in 2015. The “Getting to know new Minnesotans” series explores some of Minnesota’s immigration picture. Click to read Part One: How many immigrants? and Part Two: Where do they come from?

Immigration to the United States is severely restricted. If you want a permanent resident visa, you need to have special qualifications. Since 1920, a quota system has restricted the numbers of immigrants by category and by country. That quota system has changed in various ways – mostly becoming more complicated – over the years, but most immigration today is still based on quotas and special statuses.

One exception to quotas: Spouses and unmarried minor children of U.S. citizens, and parents of adult U.S. citizens can generally immigrate “quickly.” With processing delays, “quickly” usually means a year or more.

Not all spouses, parents and children of U.S. citizens can get these visas. If a spouse or parent or child has previously entered the United States without authorization, they still might be barred from getting a visa, sometimes for three years, sometimes for 10 years, sometimes longer.

Except for these immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, an immigrant needs special qualifications to be allowed even to apply for a visa – to “get in line” for the limited number of visas available each year.

• Family preference –An adult child or a brother or sister of a U.S. citizen or as a spouse, a minor child, or an unmarried adult child of a legal permanent resident can apply. If you qualify for a family preference visa, you can get in line. The lines stretch out for years and sometimes for decades.
• Refugee or asylum – People can apply if they can prove they are in danger of persecution because of race, religion, political opinion, nationality, or membership in a social group. The vetting process for a refugee application takes years. And, again, the United States strictly limits the number of people who can enter as refugees.
• Employment – A highly skilled or exceptional individual (think Einstein or a major league baseball star) who is sponsored by an employer can apply for one of a very limited number of visas;
• Investment – Somebody with half a million dollars or more to invest in the United States can apply for a permanent resident visa. Someone like the investors meeting with Jared Kushner’s sister in Beijing, for example.
• The lottery – USCIS describes it: “The Diversity Immigrant Visa Program (DV Program) makes up to 50,000 immigrant visas available annually, drawn from random selection among all entries to individuals who are from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States.” That last phrase is important: countries with low rates of immigration to the United States means no one from these countries is eligible to even enter the lottery: Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, China (mainland-born), Colombia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, South Korea, United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland) and its dependent territories, and Vietnam.

Twenty-four years ago, Juana left an abusive relationship, taking her twelve-year-old son and her ten- and eight-year-old daughters with her. Together they walked for six hours across the desert, leaving Mexico for the promise of a safer life in the United States.

The family was captured by the border patrol. Juana and her children ended up back in Tijuana—and in jail. Her son was jailed with the men, separated from his mother and sisters for long, fearful hours, until they were all released. Once again, they headed back to the border, this time making it across.

They came to Minnesota, a place Juana called “more beautiful than the movies.”  Juana and her children lived here for 14 years. She worked hard and paid taxes, raised her children, and saw their children born as U.S. citizens. Then, ten years ago, Juana was arrested and deported again.

Juana never had a chance to stand in line. There was no line for her – not in 1993, not in 2007, not today.Our immigration system is broken. Comprehensive immigration reform is needed, but comprehensive immigration reform has been blocked for years.

 

The Intercept summarizes the “little noticed bills, marked up in the House Judiciary Committee Thursday” that would “bring sweeping changes to the nation’s immigration enforcement apparatus, adding thousands of new deportation officers and, among other things, equipping each of them with body armor and an assault rifle.”

 

[Español abajo.]

On May 17, the Minnesota legislature approved a compromise in the REAL ID bill that does not include anti-immigrant language. They did NOT approve drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants and those licenses will not be issued.

REAL ID makes Minnesota law work with federal law, so that Minnesota drivers’ licenses can be used as identification in airports and other places. Under the new Minnesota law, Minnesota will have two classes of drivers’ licenses: compliant and non-compliant. Only a REAL ID-compliant license will be accepted for boarding a plane after next year.

People getting a drivers’ license can choose either kind. Only citizens and legal immigrants can get REAL ID-compliant licenses.

The legislature had three choices about licenses for unauthorized immigrants:

1) It could have used this law to allow issuing non-compliant licenses to unauthorized immigrants. This did not happen.

2) It could have used this law to forbid issuing any license to unauthorized immigrants. This did not happen.

3) It could have just left all language about immigrants out of the bill, leaving the current law in place. This was called a “clean” REAL ID bill. This is the bill that passed.

The REAL ID Conference Committee of 3 House members and 3 Senate members unanimously adopted compromise language on REAL ID that does not include anti-immigrant language. The House of Representatives voted 120-11 to approve this “clean” version. The Senate voted 57-8 to approve it. Governor Mark Dayton signed it into law.

Important note – There will still likely be efforts by House Republicans to put the anti-immigrant & anti-rulemaking for driver’s licenses language in a different bill, such as the Omnibus Judiciary/Public Safety budget bill. The governor vetoed the first Omnibus Judiciary/Public Safety bill on Monday 5/15. He said:

“This budget also has a controversial provision that was added into the conference report at the last minute relating to DPS’s authority to engage in rulemaking regarding lawful status for a driver’s license. As I have stated repeatedly, this language is not necessary because current law prohibits DPS from rulemaking without the Legislature’s prior approval.”

We will be watching to see what language goes into the next version of the omnibus bill. Everything happens very quickly at the end of the session. Sometimes new language is put in bills without public notice.

Please stay tuned! We will need your help to try to keep that anti-immigrant language out of any bill this year.

Noticias de REAL ID – 17 de mayo de 2017

El día 17 de mayo, la legislatura de Minnesota aprobó un compromiso en el proyecto de ley REAL ID que no incluye lenguaje antiinmigrante. No aprobaron licencias de conducir para inmigrantes indocumentados y esas licencias no serán emitidas.

REAL ID hace que la ley de Minnesota trabaje con la ley federal, por lo que las licencias de conducir de Minnesota pueden ser utilizadas como identificación en aeropuertos y otros lugares. Bajo la nueva ley de Minnesota, Minnesota tendrá dos clases de licencias de conducir: una clase de licencias que se ajusta a la ley federal y otra clase que no es conforme. Sólo se aceptará una licencia REAL ID en conformidad con el acuerdo de embarque en un avión después del próximo año.

La gente que consigue una licencia de conducir puede elegir cualquiera de las dos clases. Sólo los ciudadanos y los inmigrantes legales pueden obtener licencias REAL ID-compliant – las licencias que se ajusta a la ley federal.

La legislatura tenía tres opciones sobre licencias para inmigrantes no autorizados:

1) Podría haber utilizado esta ley para permitir la emisión de licencias no conformes a inmigrantes no autorizados. Esto no ocurrió.

2) Podría haber utilizado esta ley para prohibir la expedición de cualquier licencia a inmigrantes no autorizados. Esto no ocurrió.

3) Podría haber dejado todo el lenguaje de los inmigrantes fuera del proyecto de ley, dejando la ley actual en su lugar. Esto fue llamado un “limpio” REAL ID. Este es el proyecto de ley aprobado.

El Comité de la Conferencia REAL ID de 3 miembros de la Cámara y 3 miembros del Senado aprobaron por unanimidad un lenguaje de compromiso en REAL ID que no incluye lenguaje anti-inmigrante. La Cámara de Representantes votó 120-11 para aprobar esta versión “limpia”. El Senado votó 57-8 para aprobarlo.El gobernador Mark Dayton lo firmó como ley.

Nota importante – Todavía habrá esfuerzos por parte de los Republicanos de la Cámara para poner el lenguaje anti-inmigrante y prohibiendo reglas para las licencias de conducir en una proyecto de ley diferente, tal como la legislación Omnibus del Poder Judicial / Seguridad Pública. El gobernador vetó el proposito de Ley Omnibus Judicial / Seguridad Pública el lunes 5/15. El dijó:

“Este presupuesto también tiene una disposición polémica que se agregó en el informe de la conferencia en el último minuto en relación con la autoridad del DPS para participar en la reglamentación sobre el estatus legal para una licencia de conducir. Como he dicho repetidamente, este lenguaje no es necesario porque la ley actual prohíbe DPS de la reglamentación sin la aprobación previa de la Legislatura.”

Estaremos vigilando para ver qué lenguaje entra en la próxima versión de la legislación de omnibus. Todo sucede muy rápidamente al final de la sesión. A veces el nuevo lenguaje se pone en proyectos de ley sin aviso público.

¡Por favor manténgase al tanto! Necesitaremos su ayuda para tratar de mantener ese lenguaje anti-inmigrante fuera de cualquier proyecto de ley este año.

Nearly 50,000 Haitians living in the United States face the prospect of being forced out on July 22. That is when their Temporary Protected Status (TPS) will expire, unless extended by the Trump administration. Haitian TPS began after the 2010 earthquake, and has been extended since then because of the impossible conditions still prevailing in Haiti.

A devastating earthquake hit Haiti in January 2010, killing more than 200,000 people, injuring more than 300,000, and displacing more than two million out of a population of about 10 million. That is about one out of every give people killed, injured or homeless, in the poorest country in the hemisphere.

Aid and rescue workers from around the world swooped in to help. They brought cholera with them. Ten months later Haiti was in the middle of its first cholera outbreak in a century. By 2016, cholera had sickened more than 800,000 Haitians and killed more than 10,000.

And then, in October 2016, Hurricane Matthew swept across southern Haiti.

The country has not recovered – not from the earthquake, not from cholera’s continuing impact, not from the hurricane. In January, the Miami Herald reported on people living in caves, and others starving to death:

“Haiti’s current humanitarian situation is precarious and likely to get worse, the United Nations’ Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs warned.

“’The vast majority of agricultural households have not recovered their means of production, their financial situation is rapidly deteriorating and their access to basic services has diminished considerably because of the end of emergency programs,’ the U.N. humanitarian agency said in a report published last month.”

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) allows people from certain countries to remain in the United States and to get temporary work permits due to an emergency situation in their home countries. The Secretary of Homeland Security issues the TPS determination, and can renew or terminate the status. Right now, the Secretary of Homeland Security is looking for excuses to terminate TPS. Associated Press reported May 9:

“Internal emails obtained by The Associated Press show a top immigration official wanted not only crime data on Haitians who are protected from deportation under the Temporary Protected Status program, but also how many were receiving public benefits. Such immigrants aren’t eligible for welfare benefits….

From one of the emails:

“Please dig for any stories (successful or otherwise) that would show how things are in Haiti — i.e. rebuilding stories, work of nonprofits, how the U.S. is helping certain industries,” Kovarik wrote on April 28. “We should also find any reports of criminal activity by any individual with TPS. Even though it’s only a snapshot and not representative of the entire situation, we need more than ‘Haiti is really poor’ stories.”

Haiti is “really poor.” Right now, 50,000 Haitians living and working and paying taxes in the United States – and sending money back home to help those in desperate need.

Senators Robert Menendez and Bill Nelson wrote to the Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security on April 26, urging humanitarian, not punitive, action:

“Given Haiti’s many challenges, the United States’ focus should be to prioritize disaster assistance and recovery, not to return Haitian naitonals to a country lacking the capacity to support them. We ask that you take the urgent humanitarian situation into account when considering extending the TPS designation.”

The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) has also joined in that plea:

“The elimination of TPS for Haiti will not only create immense hardships for close to 47,000 Haitian individuals who have lived in the United States under the protection of this program for more than 7 years, it will also impact our economy and workforce. A recent study found that ending TPS for certain recipients could result in a loss of billions of dollars to the GDP.

“Members of Congress need to urge DHS Secretary Kelly to re-designate TPS for Haitians nationals. 

“America needs to continue to be a humanitarian leader, amidst the ongoing crisis in Haiti. Extending TPS for Haiti is simply the right thing to do.

 

 

More than a dozen Minnesota foundations and United Ways (Twin Cities and Greater MN) have joined in a new partnership, Solidarity MN, based on “values of inclusion, equity, and democracy.” Solidarity MN plans “to advocate for the prosperity, safety, and inclusion of our immigrant and refugee neighbors, friends, and family.”

R.T. Rybak, President and CEO of The Minneapolis Foundation said, “This is an effort by the Minnesota philanthropic community to act urgently and provide needed support to immigrant and refugee communities who are facing considerable uncertainty.”

John Keller, Executive Director of the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota said, “As someone who sees every day the contributions and challenges that many immigrants and refugees face, it’s inspiring to see such unity and urgent support from Minnesota’s foundations, banding together to respond to address this unprecedented situation.”

Solidarity MN is now accepting applications for an initial round of 40 micro-grants of $2,500 each, and plans to make grant decisions within a few weeks of receiving proposals. Priority goes to organizations led by immigrants and refugees, with eligible projects including (but not limited to):

• Direct service (interpretation, health/wellness, shelter/housing, human services, etc.)
• Legal advice/ representation
• Community organizing and education
• Staff support
• Media and communications
• Advocacy / public policy
• General operations

The organization plans to issue a request for proposals for a second, and larger, round of grants is late summer or early fall.

Founding members of the Solidarity MN partnership include:

• Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota Foundation
• Bush Foundation
• Catholic Community Foundation of Minnesota
• GHR Foundation
• Greater Twin Cities United Way
• Headwaters Foundation for Justice
• Initiative Foundation
• McKnight Foundation
• Minnesota Council on Foundations
• Northwest Area Foundation
• Pohlad Foundation
• Southwest Initiative Foundation
• The Minneapolis Foundation
• The Saint Paul Foundation
• United Ways of Greater Minnesota
• Women’s Foundation of Minnesota

Individual donors and additional foundation partners are also being sought.