PORTLAND, Ore. - The day before Arizona's tough new immigration law was set to take effect, a federal judge stopped major portions of it with a court injunction. Her objections focus on some of the more controversial elements of the law, SB 1070, such as requiring immigrants to carry registration papers and allowing arrests without warrants.

In Oregon, immigrants' rights groups have been watching the legal battle closely. Francisco Lopez, executive director of CAUSA, predicts it will end up in the U.S. Supreme Court, unless Congress sees the controversy as a cue to take action.

"The President must play a stronger leadership role, and also, Senate Republicans should engage in passing a comprehensive immigration reform bill this year. Most Americans support comprehensive immigration reform, rather than having laws like the Arizona type."

The injunction is in line with other state-level cases in which the courts have also ruled that immigration is a federal issue, not to be regulated by state law, Lopez adds.

CAUSA and other groups are planning a rally today in Portland to show their support of Arizonans who oppose SB 1070. The court injunction does not apply to some portions of the new law, and those take effect today.

Rep. Mitch Greenlick (D-33, Portland) is hoping Arizona's struggles will pave the way for a legal path for immigrants to remain in the U.S. He says he's thinking in terms of demographics: Oregon's immigrant population is a source of reliable workers that will become even more critical as Baby Boomers age.

"I don't believe people are here taking away jobs U.S. citizens want. I believe people are here because they need to work, they need to support their families, and because there's a lot of work that our folks just don't want to do. You know, I am not gonna go be picking strawberries. I'm happy to have somebody pick those strawberries for me."

Greenlick is a member of the group "State Legislators for Progressive Immigration Policy." It's made up of lawmakers from 28 states who support policies they see as less divisive than the Arizona law.

Those who support the Arizona law say immigrants have become an expensive drain on the state and contend that the federal government has not done enough to enforce border security.

The rally is scheduled for 5 p.m. at the corner of N.E. Holladay and 13th Ave., Portland.




get more stories like this via email

Advocates for immigrants are pushing back on a bill signed by Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds in the last few days of the legislative session, modeled on a recent, controversial Texas law.

Senate File 2340 gives local law enforcement officers and judges the authority to deport undocumented immigrants.

Erica Johnson, executive director of the Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice, argued the bill is an overreach, and said Iowa law enforcement officers are not authorized to enforce it.

"This is a pretty clear intervention into federal territory," Johnson pointed out. "U.S. immigration law is governed by federal law."

Much like the author of the Texas bill, supporters in Iowa blame the Biden administration for failing to slow illegal immigration, so the state has decided to take matters into its own hands.

Johnson contended the bill and other anti-immigrant sentiment during the just-completed legislative session target the very people Iowa, with its dwindling population, will depend on for its future workforce.

"What we need is communities that are safe, where workers have access to dignified, safe workplaces," Johnson emphasized. "The truth of what Iowa's future could be depends on immigrants and immigrant workers in our state, and unfortunately, this law could take us back, away from that possible future. "

Johnson added her organization will pursue legal ways to block the bill from taking effect in July.


get more stories like this via email

The future of Senate Bill 4 is still tangled in court challenges. It's the Texas law that would allow police to arrest people for illegally crossing the border. But groups are speaking out about the impact of "Operation Lone Star" on the youngest migrants. Governor Greg Abbott continues to bus migrant families to other states, many with young children - more than 100,000 families so far.

Robert Sanborn, CEO of Children at Risk, works to improve the quality of life for boys and girls in Texas, and contends the policy has put trauma on top of trauma.

"We never want children to be political pawns. We don't want maximum chaos on the backs of children. We want children to grow up and be assets for our community," he contended.

Sanborn points out that 2.2 million children in Texas are immigrants, and said it would be less stressful for kids if families were not bused in the middle of the night, and if they were allowed to pick their destination.

When immigrants arrive at the border, they are evaluated to determine if they're eligible for asylum.

Beatriz Zavala, clinical coordinator at El Paso-based Humanitarian Outreach for Migrant Emotional Health, or "HOME," said the children in this situation are at higher risk for mental health disorders.

"What is particularly troubling is the profound disregard for the stability and protection these families need. The impact on their mental health is undeniable. These are not just statistics. These are children, real children," she said.

As part of Operation Lone Star, families have been bused to Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. The governor has said the practice is needed to keep the Texas-Mexico border safe.


get more stories like this via email

Legislation in Albany would create the first right to counsel for people in immigration court.

The Access to Representation Act would provide immigrants the right to an attorney in their New York immigration cases, ending the tendency to represent themselves if they cannot afford one.

Estimates show a backlog of more than 330,000 immigration court cases, and fewer than half have attorneys. Studies show without legal counsel, migrants are less likely to remain in the U.S.

Marlene Galaz, director of immigrant rights policy for the New York Immigration Coalition, described what the bill would do.

"It has a six-year ramp-up to start implementing and building infrastructure," Galaz outlined. "Having a pipeline between law schools for law students to go into immigration practice, and getting to nonprofits and so on."

Galaz noted most opposition centers around the $150 million to fund the program but pointed out the total expenditure is less than 1% of the state's $229 billion budget. She added anti-immigrant rhetoric has also damaged support for the bill. Currently, it is in the state Senate Finance Committee.

The New York City Comptroller's office said enacting the bill would benefit the state financially. It could keep about 53,000 people from being deported, which would result in almost $8.5 billion in local, state and federal taxes over the next 30 years.

Galaz emphasized the influx of migrants has saturated the court system, leading to what could have been an avoidable backlog.

"I firmly believe that if these investments had been made when we first asked for them, I believe, like, three years ago, then we wouldn't be struggling," Galaz contended. "We would have had the infrastructure built to address an increase in welcoming our newest neighbors."

A Vera Institute survey showed 93% of New Yorkers across party lines and regions support access to attorneys for all people, including those in immigration court, and government-funded attorneys for them.


get more stories like this via email