Category Archives: April 2018

E-Verify Is a Bad Deal for Florida

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 13, 2018

CONTACT
Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822; [email protected]

E-Verify Is a Bad Deal for Florida

WASHINGTON — Florida’s Constitutional Revision Commission is currently considering P29, a proposal to force Florida employers to use a new employment authorization system, likely E-Verify. E-Verify is the federal government’s error-ridden electronic employment eligibility verification system. Below is a statement from Jessie Hahn, labor and employment policy attorney with the National Immigration Law Center:

“We have studied the effects of E-Verify for years, and the truth is it continues to harm both U.S. citizens and authorized immigrant workers. Even one job lost because of bureaucratic red tape is too many. With E-Verify, both U.S. citizens who were born abroad and authorized immigrant workers are more likely to be negatively affected by a system error, which can result in a job loss.

“The impact of E-Verify errors on Floridians has already been felt. The National Immigration Law Center has received at least one report of a U.S. citizen who was unfairly fired from her job due to an E-Verify error and had to take a lower-paid position elsewhere. This problem would be exacerbated if all employers were forced to use this system.

“Without adequate protections, those who suffer E-Verify errors may not even know why they lose their jobs. This creates a nightmarish scenario in which the government will effectively prevent some workers with skills and work authorization from obtaining work.

“We urge state lawmakers to reject this proposal, which will only hurt Floridians.”

###

DACA Recipient Stranded in Mexico Sues to Reunite with Husband in the U.S.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 10, 2018

CONTACT
Juan Gastelum, [email protected], 213-375-3149

DACA Recipient Stranded in Mexico Sues to Reunite with Husband in the U.S.

LOS ANGELES — A married couple separated by a failure of the U.S. immigration system today filed a federal lawsuit asking the court to allow them to reunite and continue their lives together at home in Los Angeles, Calif.

Marco Villada, a recipient of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and Israel Serrato, a U.S. citizen, are suing the U.S. State Department and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) after consular officials unlawfully denied Villada’s application for a spouse visa and prohibited him from returning to the U.S., potentially indefinitely. Despite having lived nearly his entire life in the U.S. and following all the rules to adjust his immigration status, Villada is currently stranded in Mexico, away from the only place he knows as home.

“I’m an American stuck in the wrong country,” Villada said. “I don’t belong here. I belong in Los Angeles. My husband, my family, my job, my life — everything is there.”

“This isn’t just hard on us, it’s impacting our family, Marco’s coworkers, and so many other people in our lives,” Serrato said. “But despite all of this, we remain hopeful that our government will do the right thing and we will be together at home again soon.”

Villada, 34, arrived in the U.S. when he was six years old and had been approved for DACA until 2019. He and Serrato were married in 2014, six months after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The couple has been working for years to adjust Villada’s status to lawful permanent residency.

In January, after USCIS approved a provisional waiver that should have allowed Villada to reenter the U.S., the couple traveled to Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, for a consular interview. There, a consular official denied their visa application on grounds that legally cannot apply. USCIS also failed to properly notify Villada that the information he provided in his visa application could render the provisional waiver he received invalid.

The lawsuit contends that Villada is eligible for a spouse visa and lawfully entitled to return to the U.S. Villada and Serrato are represented by the National Immigration Law Center, the Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin, and Mayer Brown LLP.

“Marco and Israel are living any couple’s worst nightmare,” said Stacy Tolchin, attorney with the Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin. “Their story is an example of how our immigration system fails to uphold our most fundamental family values and makes a mockery of the rule of law.”

“Unfortunately, Marco and Israel are experiencing the devastating impact of Washington’s failure to find a solution for Dreamers,” said Andrew Pincus, a partner at Mayor Brown LLP. “Marco would not be stuck in Mexico today if President Trump and Congress had reached agreement on a solution for Dreamers.”

Villada has worked as a legal assistant at a law firm in Los Angeles for four years and is beloved and missed by his coworkers. Serrato, who is back in Los Angeles, had to move out of the couple’s home due to financial difficulties without Villada’s financial contribution.

Villada’s younger brother is enlisted in the U.S. Army and slated to deploy for a second tour in the Middle East in May. The news has been especially difficult for Villada’s mother, who is now having to deal with potentially being separated from two of her sons at once.

“Immigrant youth like Marco are an inextricable part of our communities,” said Nora Preciado, senior staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center. “Marco is a loving spouse, a model employee, a brother to an active duty military member, and a vibrant member of the LGBTQ community. Our anti-immigrant policies don’t just hurt immigrants — they hurt all of us.”

“Marco’s case is an example of how the Trump administration’s politics continue to tear families apart,” said Crissel Rodriguez, Southern California regional coordinator at the California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance. “We have a president who chooses to attack and tweet about undocumented youth and fails to provide solutions that can keep families and communities safe.”

“Immigrant rights are an LGBTQ issue; more than 75,500 Dreamers identify as LGBTQ and over 36,000 of them have benefitted from DACA,” said Sarah Warbelow, legal director of the Human Rights Campaign. “Situations like Marco’s are untenable and unjust — we must do better as a country.”

The complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California today is available at www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Villada-Garibay-v-State-Dept-complaint-2018-04-10.pdf.

Audio for today’s press call is available at www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/LAWSUIT-041018.mp3

###

NILC Denounces Trump Plan to Further Militarize Border Communities

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 4, 2018

CONTACT
Juan Gastelum, [email protected], 213-375-3149

NILC Denounces Trump Plan to Further Militarize Border Communities

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration today announced a plan to send military personnel to the U.S.-Mexico border. Trump is expected to sign a proclamation directing the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security to work with the governors of affected states to deploy the National Guard.

The announcement comes days after President Trump reacted viscerally to news reports about a campaign to draw attention to human rights abuses that people fleeing violence and poverty face while migrating in search of refuge.

Kamal Essaheb, policy and advocacy director at the National Immigration Law Center, issued the following statement:

“Trump’s plan to send troops to border communities is yet another attempt to demonize immigrants and is utterly out of touch with reality. It is intended only to distract from real issues facing our country and to appease Trump, who is increasingly angry that his border wall vanity project has stalled. Just months ago, this administration was boasting about historically low unauthorized border crossings. Every American should be outraged by this wasteful, damaging, and opportunistic use of taxpayer dollars.”

###

Diverse Groups File Amicus Briefs Asking the U.S. Supreme Court to Strike Down the Muslim Ban

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 3, 2018

CONTACT
Hayley Burgess, [email protected], 202-805-0375
Christina So, [email protected], 415-848-7728
CAIR National Litigation Director Lena Masri, [email protected], 248-390-9784
CAIR Senior Litigation Attorney Gadeir Abbas, [email protected], 720-251-0425

Diverse Groups File Amicus Briefs Asking the U.S. Supreme Court to Strike Down the Muslim Ban

WASHINGTON — Hundreds of businesses, national security officials, local, state, and federal elected officials of both parties, civil rights leaders, and organizations representing impacted communities filed several dozen amicus (friend-of-the-court) briefs opposing the latest iteration of President Trump’s Muslim ban last week. The briefs, whose filers represent large swaths of Americans, provide a stark contrast to the few briefs filed in support of Trump’s ban. Oral argument on the Muslim ban before the Supreme Court will take place on April 25.

The briefs provide a variety of practical and legal arguments explaining why the Muslim ban is unconstitutional and harmful public policy.

“The breadth of groups and individuals filing amicus briefs against the Trump administration’s Muslim ban is yet another indication that the public understood this illegal effort to be an attempt to demonize Islam and stigmatize Muslims,” said CAIR Senior Litigation Attorney Gadeir Abbas.

“Hundreds of families are being torn apart. A three-year-old child has been separated from his parents and forced to live in the care of extended family thousands of miles away,” said Ibraham Qatabi, a cofounder of the Yemeni American Justice Initiative at the Center for Constitutional Rights. “A father has had to choose between keeping his job in the U.S. or joining his stranded wife and children in Djibouti. Some families have to choose between returning to a war-torn Yemen or being stranded indefinitely in a third country. This is a great injustice.”

These briefs provide the court with perspectives that may not be presented during oral argument in Hawaii v. Trump. Last December, the National Immigration Law Center and other civil rights groups successfully challenged the constitutionality of the Muslim ban before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. These groups, along with many others, shed light on the human toll the Muslim ban has already taken on families around the globe.

“The Muslim ban affects all Somalis by stopping family unification, delaying the arrival of those who have already been vetted, creating fear and uncertainty, threatening humanitarian workers travel plans, and most recently, denying the entry of the former president of Somalia,” said Jaylani Hussein, the executive director of CAIR Minnesota and an immigrant from Somalia.

Hawaii v. Trump challenges the latest iteration of President Trump’s Muslim ban, which seeks to indefinitely ban most nationals from six Muslim-majority countries from coming to the United States. This version of the ban has been in full effect since December 4, 2017.

“We’ve seen the devastating impact on countless families of U.S. citizens, green card–holders, students, and those with urgent medical needs since the Muslim Ban has been in effect,” said Elica Vafaie, an Iranian-American staff attorney with Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus. “Although the government has said that a waiver for these families is possible, in reality the government is achieving its goal of banning Muslims. We need the court to restore dignity and stop this unlawful ban.”

A full list of amicus briefs can be found here. To learn more about community rallies on April 25, please click here.

A coalition of civil rights organizations has engaged in legal, organizing, and advocacy efforts to fight back against each iteration of the Muslim ban. Learn more about these efforts by visiting www.NoMuslimBanEver.com.

###

111