Immigration Law

Category • Immigration Law Blog

Representing Thousands of Affected Immigrants, a Massachusetts Civil Rights Group is Suing to Stop the Trump Administration’s Fast-Track Deportation Policy

According to reporting from CBS Boston, the Lawyers for Civil Rights—a Boston-based legal organization—has filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump Administration in order to protect immigrants in Massachusetts and around the country. The legal complaint was filed on behalf of two immigrant rights advocacy groups: Centro Presente and Pioneer Valley Workers Center—both of which advocate for thousands of members who will be directly affected by the Trump Administration’s proposed policy. Here, our Boston deportation lawyers highlight the most important things that you need to know about this lawsuit. 

Understanding the Trump Administration’s Expedited Removal Plan

Through expedited removal as it is currently constituted, undocumented immigrants who are detained within 100 miles of the United States border can be deported on a ‘fast track’. In practice, this means that these immigrants are often ordered deported from the United States without obtaining professional legal representation and without receiving an official court hearing. Further, the expedited removal offers very limited appeal rights. 

In July of 2019, the Trump Administration issued new guidelines seeking to radically expand the coverage of expedited removal. Under the new fast track deportation policy proposed by the Trump Administration, any undocumented immigrant in the United States could be ordered removed on an expedited basis unless they can prove at residency in the United States for over two years. To be clear, the Trump Administration’s expedited removal policy would apply in every jurisdiction in the country, including in Massachusetts. 

A Lawsuit to Protect Immigrant Rights

It is worth clarifying what exactly the administration is attempting to do with this policy: President Trump is maneuvering to put all undocumented immigrants at risk of immediate deportation. This is a direct effort to take away the standard due process protections provided by United States immigration law. As explained by Iván Espinoza-Madrigal, the Executive Director for the Boston-based civil rights organization Lawyers for Civil Rights (LCR), this latest attack on immigrant rights “puts all of our communities in jeopardy and stokes unnecessary fear.”

The lawsuit filed by the civil rights groups seeks to protect and preserve immigrant rights. An expanded expedited removal policy would deny many immigrants an opportunity to have a full hearing. In most cases, expedited removal begins—and ends— with an evaluation conducted by an immigration officer. The immigrant in question can then be placed on the path towards deportation without having an opportunity to ever make their case in an immigration court. 

Discuss Your Case With Our Boston, MA Immigration Lawyers Right Away

At the Law Office of Joshua L. Goldstein, PC, our skilled Boston deportation defense lawyers are tireless and effective advocates for immigrant rights. You only have a limited amount of time to raise defense against deportation. If you or someone you know is facing deportation, please call us at (617) 722-0005 to set up fully confidential initial consultation. From our conveniently located law office in the heart of Boston, we represent clients throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 

Devastating News: Boston Immigrants With ‘Special Medical Status’ May Soon Be Ordered to Leave the Country

On August 26th, 2019, WBUR reported that United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has been sending out notification letters stating that the agency is no longer going to consider deportation waivers for immigrants with serious medical issues. Instead, these matters will be handled by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).   

Evidence that Policy Has Changed in Boston

Currently, there is considerable confusion surrounding this issue. The federal government has not publicly announced any official changes to the medical waiver program. However, there is substantial evidence coming from communities all around the greater Boston area that suggests that there have been major changes. 

Anthony Marino of the Irish International Immigrant Center told reporters from WBUR that last week nearly a half dozen of his clients — people with medical conditions that are generally approved for deportation waivers — received virtually identical denial letters. 

Within these letters, one of which was obtained and printed by WBUR, there is language that suggests that USCIS is ending the medical deferral program altogether. This comes despite the fact that nothing has been officially announced and many families are living with deep stress and frustration. 

A Potential Death Sentence for Immigrants

It is impossible to overstate the cruelty and callousness of this type of sudden policy shift. As explained in a report from the Boston Globe, sick children who are patients at Boston-area children’s hospitals are now facing potential removal from the United States. An advocate bluntly states in the story that our government is handing these children a “death sentence.” In several cases reported on by WBUR, undocumented immigrant parents of chronically ill children have received the impending deportation letters.  

Putting a Human Face on the Problem

MassLive published a story on this topic that helps to put a real human face on this problem. Jonathan Sanchez, a 16-year-old child, has been getting treatment for severe cystic fibrosis in the Boston Children’s Hospital for the last three years. His mother says that he has made significant progress during that time and that he was “nearly dying” when he first arrived for treatment. 

The family has reportedly received one of these letters from USCIS. They are now terrified that they are weeks away from facing deportation from the United States — and the potential loss of necessary and life saving medical care for their young son. This is horrific. Our law firm will closely monitor this issue for updates. 

Set Up a Case Evaluation With Our Boston, MA Immigration Attorney Right Away

At the Law Office of Joshua L. Goldstein, PC, our top-rated Massachusetts immigration lawyers are committed to achieving successful results for our clients. We handle the complete range of immigration law matters. For a fully private immigration consultation, please call us now at (617) 722-0005. With an office location in Boston, we serve clients all around the region, including in Brookline, Waltham, Framingham, Lowell, Lawrence, Salem, Brockton, Somerville, and Newton. 

 

Boston Mayor Marty Walsh Supports Immigrants, Stands Behind Newly Amended ‘Trust Act’

As reported by WGBH, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh recently told Boston Public Radio that immigrants should be able to feel safe in our city. The mayor’s statements came after rumors swirled that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), under the instructions of the Trump Administration, was preparing to launch major raids in dozens of cities across the country — including in Boston. 

However, Mayor Walsh and Boston Mayor’s Office for Immigrant Advancement Director Yusufi Vali confirmed that there was no evidence of unusual deportation raids in the city. In addition, the Mayor also reaffirmed his support for the Boston Trust Act — a local law that was recently amended to clarify that the Boston Police Department will not act as an immigration enforcement agency. 

The Boston Trust Act: Explained

Passed unanimously by the City Council in 2014, the Boston Trust Act is a local ordinance that seeks to ensure that all immigrants are able to fully and completely participate in economic life and civil life in Boston. Among other things, the Trust Act limits cooperation between city law enforcement agencies and law enforcement officers and federal immigration agents. It is sometimes referred to as Boston’s sanctuary city statute.  

However, there have been some serious questions raised about the viability of the Boston Trust Act — especially in the light of the harsh actions that have been taken by the Trump Administration to undermine immigrant rights. 

In June of 2019, city officials, supported by Mayor Walsh, filed amendments to make the Boston Trust Act significantly stronger. Specifically, the amendments make it clear that local law enforcement officers in Boston will not arrest someone based solely on their immigration status. In Boston, the police will not make an immigration arrest unless a court order in place.

ICE Can Still Conduct Operations in Sanctuary Cities

It should be made clear that local sanctuary status is not a blanket protection against federal enforcement action. 

Boston is one of nearly a dozen cities and towns in the state of Massachusetts that identify as a ‘sanctuary’ jurisdictions for undocumented immigrants. The Boston Police Department is focused on handling local matters — not handling federal immigration issues. Still, sanctuary laws like the Boston Trust Act, as important as they are, will not always prevent ICE from conducting raids. 

If you or your loved one was arrested or detained by ICE in Massachusetts, immediate action is a must. It is imperative that you reach out to an experienced Boston, MA immigration attorney as soon as possible. 

Discuss Your Case With Our Boston, MA Immigration Lawyer Today

At the Law Office of Joshua L. Goldstein, PC, our Boston immigration attorney is a compassionate and committed advocate for clients. We handle the full range of immigration cases, including defense against deportation or removal. To schedule a strictly confidential immigration consultation, please call us today at (617) 722-0005. With a law office in Boston, we serve communities throughout the state of Massachusetts. 

 

Undocumented Immigrants in Massachusetts are Fighting for the Right to Get a Driver’s License

According to the most recent information provided by the National Conference of State Legislators (NCSL), undocumented immigrants are eligible to apply for a driver’s license in 12 different U.S. states. Unfortunately, Massachusetts is not one of these states.

A group of activists is pushing to make a change. As reported by Inequality.org, the Pioneer Valley Workers’ Center is part of a statewide coalition pushing for reforms to the Massachusetts driver’s licensing standards. Here, our Boston, MA immigration attorney explains why all adults should be allowed to apply for a driver’s license, regardless of immigration status.

We are a Car-Based Society: 80 Percent of Workers in Massachusetts Drive to their Job

Perhaps more than any other developed country in the world, the United States is an automobile-based society. As noted by Inequality.org in their report on this issue, nearly eight in 10 Massachusetts workers indicate that they typically drive get to their job. For people who live outside the City of Boston, the percentage is even higher than that. Preventing a person from getting a driver’s license dramatically reduces their economic opportunities and their ability to support themselves, their family, and their community.

Undocumented Immigrants Should Be Able to Drive Without Fear

No one wants to be pulled over. For undocumented immigrants, the fear associated with a traffic stop is exponentially higher. In many cases, that initial stop, and the lack of a driver’s license, will eventually lead to deportation proceedings. Even a simple stop for something like rolling through a stop sign could result in criminal charges for driving without a license, and, subsequently, removal from the United States.

As explained by Andrea Schmid, an organizer who works at the Pioneer Valley Workers’ Center, it is “very easy” for undocumented immigrants to get caught up in the system simply because they lack the ability to get a driver’s license. If you are caught driving without a license in Massachusetts, you could face an arrest and criminal charges. In many cases, this is what triggers deportation.

The Proposal: Pass the Work and Family Mobility Act

Activists and organizers are pushing Massachusetts legislators to support a bill called the Work and Family Mobility Act. Essentially, this law would allow undocumented immigrants in Massachusetts to obtain an ordinary driver’s license — one that is no different than the one that is issued to any other driver in Massachusetts. This would help increase economic opportunities for undocumented immigrants and reduce fear from the Trump Administration’s draconian immigration policies. Notably, similar legislation has already proven to be very effective in other states, including in California, Maryland, Connecticut, and Vermont.

We Support Immigrant Rights in Massachusetts

At the Law Office of Joshua L. Goldstein, PC, we are proud to support immigrant and immigrant rights in Massachusetts. Our top-rated Boston immigration has more than fifteen years of experience handling the full range of immigration law matters. To set up a strictly confidential immigration law consultation, please contact our law firm right away.

Two Massachusetts Prosecutors Sue Trump Administration Over Courthouse Immigration Arrests

According to reporting from Boston.com, two of the top prosecutors in Massachusetts have filed a joint lawsuit against the federal government, challenging the Trump Administration’s authority to conduct immigration enforcement operations at courthouses. This action comes days after a Massachusetts judge was indicted for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant escape out the backdoor of a state courthouse to avoid ICE. Here, our Boston immigration attorney provides an overview of the lawsuit and explains why ICE courthouse raids make our community less safe.

The Legal Argument: Violation of the Constitutional Right to Access Courts

The lawsuit — which is reported to be the first of its kind in the country — was filed by Rachael Rollins, the District Attorney for Suffolk County and Marian Ryan, the District Attorney for Middlesex County. In their complaint, they raise a number of different legal arguments against the federal government.

Most importantly, they argue that the Trump Administration’s policy of conducting immigration enforcement operations at Boston-area courthouses has the effect of denying many community members their constitutional right to reasonably access the courts.

When immigrants fear the possibility of an ICE raid, they are simply much less likely to participate in the legal process at all— even though they may be witnesses to the crime or even the victim of the crime. District Attorney Marian Ryan stated in a press conference that she has recently had multiple criminal cases disrupted because of this issue.

Courthouse Enforcement Operations Make Our Community Less Safe

In far too many cases, crime victims are unable to access justice because witnesses are too afraid of deportation to participate in court proceedings. Getting justice for the community requires making state and federal courts a safe space from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids and other enforcement operations. Officials in other states, including in New York and in California, have also taken action to limit the ability of federal immigration officers to conduct enforcement operations in courthouses.

Notably, the lawsuit filed by District Attorney Rollins and District Attorney Ryan comes just days after a Massachusetts judge was arrested for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant evade an ICE agent inside a courthouse. As reported by National Public Radio (NPR), Judge Shelley Richmond Joseph of the Newton District Court was charged with obstruction of justice by federal prosecutors in Massachusetts after she allegedly helped an undocumented immigrant slip out of the back door while an ICE agent was waiting in the front of the courthouse. A now-retired court officer was also charged in the case. They both have pleaded not guilty.

Get Help From Our Boston, MA Immigration Attorney Today

At the Law Office of Joshua L. Goldstein, PC, our Boston immigration attorneys are committed to providing exceptional legal representation to immigrants and their family members. We are strong advocates for immigrant rights in Massachusetts.

To set up a fully confidential review of your case, please do not hesitate to contact us today at (617) 722-0005. From our office in Boston, we represent clients throughout the region including in Suffolk County, Middlesex County, and Norfolk County.

 

Los Angeles 7-Eleven Stores Raided By ICE Agents, No Warrants Were Presented

On the morning of January 10th, 2018, federal immigration agents raided 7-Eleven store locations in nearly two dozen states across the country. According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, several 7-Eleven stores in Southern California were among those that were subject to the immigration raids.

Questions are now being raised over whether or not California law was properly followed by employers. California State Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) informed reporters that he will be asking the California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and the California Labor Commissioner’s office to investigate this situation to ensure that there was full compliance with the requirements of California law.

California Employers Must Request a Judicial Warrant From Immigration Officers

On October 5th of 2017, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill No. 450 (AB-450) into law. This legislation put restrictions on employer cooperation with immigration enforcement agents at California worksites. The law became effective as of January 1st, 2018. Among several other things, AB-450 bars California employers from voluntarily giving federal immigration agents access to their premises. Specific provisions include:

  1. A requirement that employers seek a judicial warrant from ICE agents;
  2. A mandate that employers give notice to workers if certain type of immigration enforcement action is set to occur; and
  3. The creation of penalties for any violation of these rules.  

The goal of this law is to provide enhanced protections to immigrants in California. This has become an especially important issue as additional threats to immigrant rights have come from the Trump Administration.

Warrants Were Not Served at the Southern California 7-Eleven Stores

According to the information in the reporting from the Los Angeles Times, ICE did not obtain judicial warrants before conducting raids at the 7-Eleven stores. Instead, a spokesperson for ICE stated that officers served these stores with I-9 inspection notices. This has raised serious questions about whether or not California law was followed by the employers.

Workplace Raids May Be Increasing

Workplace raids have long been a tactic used by immigration enforcement agencies. While this type of aggressive action was used less frequently during the Obama Administration, the recent 7-Eleven raid indicate that workplace immigration enforcement raids may be making a return. On January 15th, 2018, The New York Times published a well-sourced story suggesting that the Trump Administration plans to increase the use of job-site raids in the coming months. This is an issue that must be watched closely. It is imperative that California employers follow state law and the immigrant communities are fairly protected.

Contact Our Immigration Lawyers Today

At the Law Office of Joshua L. Goldstein, PC, we represent people in immigration court who are facing deportation or removal from the United States. Our legal practice is dedicated to protecting the legal rights of immigrants and their families. For immediate assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

 

Credit Building Tips for Los Angeles Residents

Whether you are a recent immigrant to the United States or you have been here for a long time, you can take steps to build positive credit. Having a high credit score will help you with your financial decisions in the future, whether you need to take out a loan to go to college or apply for a mortgage to purchase a home.

Many individuals, both immigrants and native-born Americans alike, do not know how to build their credit. If you are not sure where to start with building your credit, apply the following tips to your everyday life.

Consider a Secured Credit Card

If you do not have sufficient credit to qualify for an unsecured credit card, apply for a secured credit card. A secured credit card is a credit card that an applicant can obtain by putting down a sum of money as collateral with the lender. That sum of money then becomes his or her credit limit. For example, you can apply for a secured credit card with a $500 credit limit with the bank by giving the bank $500 in cash to use as collateral. Because of this collateral, anybody can open a secured credit card and begin building positive credit.

Pay your Bills on Time

Your rent, your utility bills, your credit card bills, and any other bills you have need to be paid on or before their due dates. This is key to building and maintaining positive credit. With credit card bills, it is possible to pay less than what is due, known as the “minimum payment.” This amount is printed on your credit card bill, but do not let yourself get into the habit of only paying the minimum payment each month – allowing your debt to accrue will actually cost you more money in the long run because you will need to pay interest on the balance you carry on your credit card.

Pay your Bills in Full

This goes with the issue above – not only should your credit card bills be paid on time, they should be paid in full. Alongside the issue of having to pay interest on debt accrued, you can also lose track of how much you owe to your lender and reach the point of “maxing out” your credit card.

Become an Authorized User on Another Person’s Card

If possible, you can also build your own credit score by becoming an authorized user on somebody else’s card. This other party could be your spouse or another relative, such as a parent or a sibling. Establish an agreement with this other party beforehand. As an authorized user of their credit card, you are not legally obligated to pay for the charges you make – they are. Discuss how you will reimburse him or her before you become an authorized user.

Work with a Skilled Immigration Attorney

Having a strong credit score can help you immensely when you need to take big steps with your finances. For guidance with the legal issues that can accompany these steps or other types of help during the immigration process, contact immigration attorney Joshua L. Goldstein at The Law Offices of Joshua L.Goldstein, P.C. today to set up your legal consultation.

Using FOIA to your Advantage

In the United States, you have the right to request important information from the federal government under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). As an individual working through the process of becoming an American citizen, you could be required to use this right at some point, especially if you run into legal issues when applying for a work visa or green card. This is because it is possible that there is background information about you in your immigration record that somehow complicates matters like this. Find out what information is available to the federal government by filing a FOIA request with the aid of an experienced immigration attorney. If the United States federal government has information about you that it can potentially use against you, you have a right to know about it.

How to Seek Information Under FOIA

Your immigration file contains information that can be of significant value to you. However, you can also potentially run into issues with obtaining this information if you came to the country before 1982 or if the information in your record has been redacted, or blacked out, because it contains the names of government officials or individuals other than yourself.

Before you start working with an attorney or contacting government agencies, determine which information you need. This will determine the agency with which you file your request and how you file it.

Once you determine the information you need, or if you determine that you need to see your entire immigration file, you or your attorney will make a formal request to the correct agency. This might be the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), or the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Along with your request, you will need to provide your reason for seeking the information. Your attorney can help you craft this statement and, if necessary, request that the officials handling the request expedite it if you are in a situation where your life, health, or safety is at risk.

Generally, a FOIA request takes five to six weeks to complete, sometimes up to 80 days. When you request that your case be expedited, you can expect to receive your file within 20 days to one month. If you are in need of more immediate information, your attorney can provide a detailed statement of how your life, health, safety, or liberty is at risk to have the request handled in an even quicker manner.

Work with a Boston Immigration Attorney

If you need to file a FOIA request, work with an experienced immigration attorney who can guide you through the steps you need to take and help you understand the information you receive as a result of your request. To start working with immigration attorney Joshua L. Goldstein, schedule your legal consultation with The Law Offices of Joshua L. Goldstein, P.C., today.

DAPA hits the Supreme Court: an immigration lawyer’s analysis

For immigration lawyers and millions of people in the U.S. hoping and dreaming for DAPA and other immigration options, this summer’s expected Supreme Court decision will be profoundly life-changing.

Background on the DAPA case

In 2013, the Senate passed S.744, a bipartisan Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill that would have taken steps toward fixing a number of problems with the current immigration system. But Republicans in the House of Representatives killed this bill.

In response, on November 20, 2014, President Obama issued his Immigration Accountability Executive Action. The goal of this was to provide common sense fixes to certain problems and inspire Congress to take more sweeping action.

This executive action included an expansion of the previously implemented Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, and the announcement of a new program called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA).

These are both deferred action programs that provide eligible individuals with temporary administrative relief from deportation and permission to work.

Expanded DACA

The DACA expansion includes: the elimination of the upper age limit (meaning individuals born before June 15, 1981 who are otherwise eligible, could now apply); the change of entry date from June 15, 2007 to January 1, 2010; and an extended validity period. DACA grants will be for three years, instead of two.

DAPA

DAPA, the new program, is targeted at immigrant parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents and similarly provides a 3-year period of relief from deportation along with permission to work.

To be eligible for DACA, applicants must:

  • Have lived continuously in the U.S. since January 1, 2010;
  • Have been present in the U.S. on November 20, 2014;
  • As of November 20, 2014, had a son or daughter who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident;
  • Not have had lawful immigration status on November 20, 2014 or at the time of application for DAPA; and
  • Not have been convicted of certain crimes.

According to the Brookings Institute, 4 millions people may be eligible for DAPA.

Republican launch partisan lawsuit against DAPA

Republicans in Texas and 25 other states brought a challenge to this executive order in federal court, specifically seeking to block the expansion of DACA and the implementation of DAPA. The Republican-led states argued that the President’s exercise of discretion was an unconstitutional overreach.

Then, on February 13, 2016, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away unexpectedly. With his passing, there are now only 8 justices on the Supreme Court. And Republicans in the Senate have refused to hold hearings and vote on any Obama nominee to replace Scalia.

Possible outcomes of DAPA case

A loss for immigrants

The worst outcome would be a 5-3 decision striking DAPA as an an unconstitutional use of executive authority. Such a decision would have implications far beyond the death of DAPA.

A loss in this case could prevent or limit future presidents from taking action on immigration matters. This outcome would mean that, having blocked legislative action, Republicans would have killed executive action as well. Immigration gridlock would continue for the foreseeable future.

A tied decision would be a loss

With 8 sitting justices, a tie is a theoretical possibility. When a Supreme Court case is decided with a tie, the lower court’s decision stands, but no precedent is set.

In the DAPA case, a tie would reaffirm the conservative Fifth Circuit’s decision, allowing a nationwide injunction on DAPA, but the expansion of DACA to remain in place.

A win for immigrants

The Supreme Court could affirm the legal validity of DAPA. If so, millions of people could begin filing DAPA application.

This is the outcome that the American Immigration Council predicts and the one that I’m hoping for. In this view, the Republican-led states lack standing and the Executive branch has wide discretion to implement and enforce immigration laws. This would also allow future presidents to take executive action on immigration and other contexts.

Immigration Lawyer ready to help with DAPA

Our office will be keeping a close eye on what happens with DAPA. We are hopeful for a positive result, and as soon as we have more information, we will provide it to you on our website and through our newsletter.

Should the Supreme Court uphold executive action on immigration, we will be here to help you prepare and file expanded DACA, as well as DAPA, applications. Come see us to discuss your immigration options. Meanwhile, let’s keep our fingers crossed!

2016: The Year Ahead in Immigration Law

Presidential Election

We’re in an election year and this election will have a big impact on immigration policy. The presidential campaigns are already going strong, and they’ve been pretty unusual and unpredictable so far.

On the Republican side, immigration has become a central issue in their campaigns. A number of the candidates have been speaking to and validating one of the worst characteristics in the American people – xenophobia. The messaging has gone past the point of offensive – it’s become racist.

Donald Trump has called for a ban on all Muslims entering the U.S.; has said Mexicans coming into the U.S. are rapists, criminals and drug dealers; has indicated that he would deport the over 11 million undocumented people in the U.S.; has plans to end birthright citizenship; and has stated he wants to build a “real wall” to keep out immigrants on the U.S.-Mexican border. While Ted Cruz doesn’t go quite as far as Trump in his rhetoric, he supported Trump’s plan to stop all Muslims from entering the U.S.; wants to ban non-Christian Syrian refugees; also wants to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border; supports the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants; and has stated he would triple border protection, among other things. Instead of reaching out to immigrants and seeing their potential to add to and improve the United States, the Republican party candidates talk about immigrants using words of prejudice and paranoia.

On the democratic side, the two main candidates, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, both support the rights of immigrants as well as the idea of Comprehensive Immigration Reform with a path to citizenship. They’ve spoken out against the hate that the Republican candidates have been selling. They have reaffirmed their support of President Obama’s executive action on immigration reform and have each taken a stand against the recent deportation raids conducted by the Obama administration.

he next President will impact the immigration system in a number of ways – he or she will affect what happens with Comprehensive Immigration Reform, detention centers for immigrant mothers and children, deportation raids, discretionary relief policies, and enforcement priorities. So, the question is, will the American people elect a President who glorifies hate and intolerance, or will the country choose a candidate who will defend the rights of immigrants?

Recently, with Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, the Presidential election has taken on even more importance for immigration. There is now a vacant Supreme Court seat. President Obama will try to nominate a candidate in the remaining months that he is in office, but he is already getting a large amount of pushback from Republicans. Republicans are urging the Senate to delay the consideration and confirmation of any Supreme Court nominee until the next President is in office. With many important Supreme Court cases in the pipeline, including United States v. Texas (the case that will determine the legitimacy of Obama’s executive action on immigration), the appointment of a new Supreme Court Justice is critical. We’ll provide more updates and information on the United States v. Texas case and Justice Scalia’s potential replacements in our next newsletter!

1 2