Jobs

Mass Immigration May End the Careers of Two Mass Immigration Politicians

“The revolution, like Saturn, devours its own children,” observed Georges-Jacques Danton, a leading figure of the French revolution. Danton had good reason to feel that way, as the executioner’s guillotine was about to separate him from his head for the “crime” of being too moderate as the revolution turned increasingly bloody.

Howard Berman and Charles Rangel may soon have a better insight into what Danton was feeling in 1794. Both of these long-time members of the House of Representatives are in danger of falling victim to the mass immigration revolution they led or abetted. Berman is engaged in a political life-and-death struggle with fellow incumbent Brad Sherman in Los Angeles’s shrinking middle class suburbs of the San Fernando Valley. California’s redistricting commission carved up Berman’s old district to reflect the demographic realities created by years of sustained high levels of immigration.

Across the country, Rangel, who has represented Harlem for more than 40 years, is facing a tough primary battle in a newly drawn district where Latinos outnumber blacks. Age, poor health, and ethics issues also dog Rangel, but it is likely he would have coasted to a 22nd term in Congress if not for the immigration-driven demographic transformation of his constituency.

The irony of Berman’s circumstance is that he has done more than just about any other member of Congress to create the very situation which may end his political career. Since first being elected to Congress in 1982, Berman has fought tirelessly for mass immigration and mass amnesty. And, if he manages to hang on to his seat, it will come at the expense of Sherman who has been a loyal foot soldier, supporting every effort to maximize immigration since he arrived in Washington in 1997.

Rangel, too, has been a dependable supporter of mass immigration and amnesty. From his powerful position on the House Ways and Means Committee (before much of his power was stripped from him because of ethics violations) he has had a bird’s eye view of the toll mass immigration has taken on American taxpayers and public resources. In his newly redrawn district, where Latinos comprise 55 percent of voters, he is facing the most serious electoral challenge of his political career from State Senator Adriano Espaillat.

Other Democrats, who are leading or cheering the drive for mass immigration and amnesty, may want to take note. As Danton reputedly said to Maximilien Robespierre, his co-revolutionary turned nemesis, “If we cannot get together to slow this down it will kill us both.”

Justice Dept. Seeks to Intimidate Alabama School Districts

The following story appeared in FAIR’s May 7 Legislative Update. To subscribe to FAIR’s Legislative Update click here.

In its relentless quest to prevent state and local officials from enforcing immigration laws, the Department of Justice (DOJ) last week sent another letter of intimidation to the Alabama State Department of Education. In the letter, Civil Rights Division chief Thomas Perez drops a thinly veiled threat of litigation to persuade Alabama officials to back away from its immigration enforcement law, HB 56, and specifically the provision that requires schools to collect immigration data on its students.

To-date, Perez writes, the DOJ investigation shows that “H.B. 56 has had significant and measurable impacts on Alabama’s school children.” These impacts, Perez states, have weighed most heavily on Hispanic and English language learner students.

Perez states these findings are based on local school data and anecdotal evidence. The local school data, which Perez says raises “significant concern,” shows that between the start of the school year and February 2012, 13.4 percent of Alabama’s Hispanic schoolchildren withdrew from school. Remarkably, however, Perez appears unable to explain whether those school children re-enrolled in the same school district, re-enrolled in another Alabama school district, or left the state. He also does not specify what the normal withdrawal rate is in any given year to provide context.

Perez cites no other data given to him by the Alabama Department of Education to support his conclusions. Instead, he writes that anecdotal evidence backs up his claim that HB 56 is unlawfully impacting Hispanics residing in Alabama. Writing with deliberate vagueness, Perez states that “many” Hispanic students reported staying home from school or withdrawing out of fear and that “many students” conveyed that HB 56 made them “feel unwelcome in the schools they had attended for years.” “Hispanic children,” he adds, “reported increased anxiety and diminished concentration in school, deteriorating grades, and increased hostility, bullying, and intimidation.”

This letter from the DOJ to the Alabama Department of Education is not the first. In November 2011, Perez sent a letter to Alabama demanding its schools provide data about student absenteeism since the beginning of the 2011-2012 school year. (See FAIR Legislative Update, Nov. 7, 2011) At first, Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange balked at the request for local school data, but later the state agreed to cooperate with the DOJ investigation. However, it appears that the local school data, which Alabama sent to the DOJ in early April, did not provide the DOJ with the evidence of discrimination it sought as the most recent letter focused almost entirely on anecdotal reports and recitations of existing federal law.

The timing of this last DOJ letter was also unmistakable. It was sent to Alabama officials the very week the state legislature was scheduled to debate and vote on changes to HB 56. As it turns out, however, the Alabama Senate postponed debate on the legislation to amend HB 56 (HB 658) to this week.

Sen. Rubio’s Quest for DREAM Act a Political Shield for the President

All this DREAM Act chatter is accomplishing precisely what amnesty proponents want – a distraction from this administration’s immigration positions. The administration’s blatant disregard for the rule of law, its systematic dismantling of immigration enforcement, and its attack on states that want to assist in the enforcement of U.S. immigration law, are all policies that are very unpopular with the American people.

What better way to distract from serious discussion of the need to enforce our immigration laws than renewed political theater over another amnesty bill that won’t pass? Click here to read a few thoughts as to why Senator Rubio’s quest to pass the DREAM Act represents both bad policy and politics.

Move Over California, Oregon is Now Goofier than You

If you thought that no one could top California when it comes to pandering to illegal aliens, you are wrong. That honor now belongs to Oregon.

In a letter to May Day demonstrators (you know, those nice folks who dress in black and smash shop windows), Gov. John Kitzhaber announced that Oregon law enforcement officers will soon accept the Mexican Matricula Consular card as proof of identity during traffic stops. In other words, people who don’t have driver’s licenses, or, in just two words, illegal aliens.

Illegal aliens will still not be eligible for Oregon driver’s licenses, but as long as they have their Matricula cards there won’t be any actual penalty for driving without a license. They will be issued citations and released. It is unlikely that the state will be able to collect any fines from them because, unlike people who have driver’s licenses, Oregon has no authority to suspend, revoke or refuse to renew a Matricula card. So, under the new policy, Oregon doesn’t really care if you know what you’re doing while driving on their roads, they just want to know who you are.

Of course, Gov. Kitzhaber has a really good reason for the new policy. “Right now, too many Oregonians are travelling from home to work, or school, or church, in risk of violating the law,” Kitzhaber stated in his letter. Hence, the torch is passed from California to Oregon. The Governor of Oregon is doing his part to make sure that people who are in violation of laws against being in the country illegally, working here illegally, and driving illegally, are in no “risk of violating the law.” Top that one Jerry Brown!

Illegal Aliens Continue Going Public to Avoid Deportation

One of the newest trends illegal aliens are embracing as a means to escape deportation might surprise you: they’re going public.

This brazenness is thanks to the Obama Administration’s issuance of prosecutorial discretion guidelines, which direct DHS agents to ignore illegal aliens so long as they are not convicted of crimes the Administration deems serious. (See FAIR’s Morton Memos Summary, Jan. 2012)

This mandated “discretion” sends a clear message to illegal aliens that it’s okay to break the law. The amount of confidence bestowed by President Obama’s administrative amnesty policies has been enough to encourage illegal aliens to come out of hiding, stage their own rallies, and even challenge immigration authorities directly.

Here is a sampling of these “coming out” stories:

• In February, José Luis Zelaya, a graduate student at Texas A&M University, gained attention by running for the highly publicized position of Student Body President, integrating his illegal status into his campaign platform. (Fox News Latino, Feb. 29, 2012)

• Daniela Palaez of Florida gained nationwide attention in March when she was named her high school’s 2012 valedictorian. Palaez, who was brought to the U.S. as a young child, was facing imminent deportation until her story went viral and Florida Reps. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen and David Rivera, as well as Sens. Marco Rubio and Bill Nelson, made public appeals on her behalf. Within four days, ICE granted Palaez a two-year deferment of deportation, citing prosecutorial discretion. (FOX Phoenix, March 2, 2012; see also CBS Miami, March 6, 2012)

• In mid-April, Florida State University Law School graduate and tourist visa overstayer Jose Godinez-Samperio was spotlighted by the media when he petitioned for admission to the Florida Bar Association. The Florida Board of Bar Examiners is now requesting decision assistance from the Supreme Court, which marked the case “high profile.” (Chicago Tribune, April 16, 2012; see also Orlando Sentinel, April 15, 2012)

• Mohammed Abdollahi, an illegal alien residing in Michigan, brazenly explained that “the more public [illegal aliens] are with our stories, the safer we are.” (USA Today, March 12, 2012) Abdohalli, fearing he would be deported after years of living in the country illegally, got himself arrested and publicly pled his case. Sure enough, his lawyer was notified by an immigration official that Abdohalli would not be pursued for deportation. (Id.) Abdollahi now works for the National Immigrant Youth Alliance (NIYA).

• Most recently, Dulce Matuz, an illegal alien and graduate of Arizona State University, was granted a coveted spot on TIME Magazine’s 2012 list of the Top 100 Influential People in the World. Matuz, who is the founder of the Arizona DREAM Act Coalition, is working hard to reach Latino voters in Arizona with her belief that illegal immigrants deserve a pathway to citizenship. (WCVB-Boston, April 20, 2012; see also TIME Magazine, April 18, 2012)

So many illegal aliens feel comfortable going public under this Administration that they’ve even created their own day of recognition. National Coming Out of the Shadows Day was first hosted in 2010 by the Immigrant Youth Justice League (IYJL). The group’s Facebook page proudly notes that their event spurred “actions of civil disobedience” in a multitude of states. (See IYJL Facebook Page; see also Business Week, April 16, 2012) One such action took place in Philadelphia, where two illegal alien students challenged immigration officers by entering an ICE field office and declaring their illegal status. They were arrested for blocking a street and ICE initially filed detainers on the two students, but eventually released them without consequence. (Bi-College News, March 20, 2012)

While some illegal aliens choose to “remain in the shadows,” a growing number continue to flaunt their status as if their unlawful presence alone merits citizenship, and suddenly a different descriptor comes to mind: entitled.

The rise in confrontational tactics by illegal aliens provides clear confirmation that President Obama’s administrative amnesty measures are serving as positive reinforcement to the illegal community, cementing the idea that illegal aliens deserve citizenship simply due to their presence.

FAIR Previews Arizona SB 1070 Supreme Court Case

On Wednesday, April 25, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Arizona v. United States of America, the case that will decide the fate of SB 1070, Arizona’s immigration enforcement law. To help guide our members through the hearing, FAIR’s Government Relations Department just released a summary of the arguments both parties submitted in briefs to the Court.

FAIR’s summary looks at the four sections that the Department of Justice has challenged as well as the arguments Arizona has made in support of its law and the arguments the Department of Justice has made in an attempt to strike it down. Click here to download the document and get the details to prepare for the outcome of this landmark case.