More than 1,500 bills were introduced the first quarter of 2011. This year only 865 have been introduced in 45 state legislatures and the District of Columbia during the same period, said the report released Tuesday.

The number of laws enacted is also down. As of March 31, 27 states enacted 24 laws and adopted 74 resolutions. That represents a 30 percent drop in the number of measures enacted in the first quarter of 2012, compared to the same period a year ago.  An additional five bills were awaiting governors’ signatures.

State Sen. John Watkins, R-Va., said that the drop off is due to the case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, regarding the constitutionality of Arizona’s controversial immigration law, known as SB1070.

“This issue has not dropped off of the radar screen in state legislatures,” he said in a NCSL news release. “Some states are waiting to see how the Supreme Court rules on immigration issues before moving ahead with their own policy debates.”

While the Supreme Court case may explain the drop in part, some states are questioning whether laws like SB1070 are good for their economy, said David Leopold, incoming general council for the American Immigration Lawyer’s Association.

“These types of laws don’t help the states economically,”  Leopold said. “In fact, there’s evidence out there that they actually hurt the state’s gross domestic product.”

This year, five states — Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Rhode Island, and West Virginia — introduced omnibus enforcement bills, each includin elements similar to those in SB1070, according to the report. Mississippi’s and West Virginia bills have failed; The others were pending as of March 31.

This was originally published by the National Journal.

In a letter dated May 2, 2012, the ACLU and the Colorado Coalition Against Domestic Violence (CCADV) explained to Garfield County Sheriff Lou Vallario that such referrals were “out of step with Colorado law” and “created a strong and perverse disincentive for undocumented victims and witnesses of domestic violence to report the abuse to law enforcement.” The ACLU and CCADV urged Sheriff Vallario to put an immediate end to this “harmful practice” and extended an offer to collaborate with the Sheriff to create a new policy that would encourage victims of domestic violence to contact the police when abuse occurs. In a brief response to the ACLU, GCSD has signaled its unwillingness to consider a policy change.

ACLU Staff Attorney Rebecca T. Wallace said: “When undocumented victims of domestic violence are referred to ICE as a result of reporting the abuse to law enforcement, the signal to the undocumented population is clear. If you call the police to report domestic violence, you may end up being deported.”

According to the ACLU letter, this message “has the predictable effect of deterring undocumented people from contacting the police to report crimes of domestic violence and diminishing the goodwill towards peace officers that undoubtedly GCSD wishes to foster with the substantial immigrant community in the Roaring Fork Valley.”

Ms. Wallace explained that “effective law enforcement requires that victims of crime, whether documented or undocumented, feel safe reporting crime to law enforcement. This is particularly true in conflicts involving domestic violence, which often occurs behind closed doors in the context of an intimate relationship.” It is with this concern in mind that the Colorado legislature, even while passing a law requiring sheriffs to report certain arrestees to ICE, carved out an explicit exception to the reporting requirement for domestic violence arrestees. The law is called Senate Bill 90 (SB-90), and the domestic violence exception to SB-90 provides for sheriffs to refrain from reporting a domestic violence arrestee to ICE unless and until that individual is
convicted.

“The ACLU generally opposes programs such as SB-90 and Secure Communities, in part because they target people for referral to ICE at the time of arrest, sometimes capturing people who may never even be charged with a state crime, including crime victims, witnesses and individuals subjected to unconstitutional arrests,” said ACLU Legal Director Mark Silverstein. “These programs not only deter people from accessing the criminal justice system, but also invite racial profiling by state and local law enforcement. That being said, SB-90′s domestic violence exception at least mitigates some of the possible negative effects of arrestee referrals.”

According to the letter, adherence to SB-90′s domestic violence exception is necessary to protect domestic violence victims, because it is not uncommon for victims of domestic violence to be mistakenly arrested on domestic violence charges. The letter explains that this can occur because, “abusers will report their victims to the police in an effort to further victimize them.” Additionally, self-defending victims are sometimes . . . caught up in dual arrests when law enforcement are unable to ascertain who the ‘predominant aggressor’ is.”
Ms. Wallace emphasized that “to avoid deterring domestic violence victims from reporting the abuse to law enforcement, it is essential that undocumented domestic violence arrestees not be reported to ICE until after conviction.” Yet, according to the letter, the Garfield County Sheriff’s Department automatically reports to ICE all domestic violence arrestees whom they suspect to be undocumented, without waiting to learn if the person is convicted. The ACLU interviewed and reviewed the records of undocumented women who were the victims of serious domestic violence, reported the crime to law enforcement, were arrested on domestic violence charges, and were booked into the Garfield County Jail. In each case, all charges against the victims were dismissed, yet – according to the letter – because GCSD employees automatically reported the victims to ICE at booking, the victims were placed in deportation proceedings.

“In talking to these victims, they clearly and reasonably felt re-victimized by being sent into ICE detention simply because they had interacted with the police about the abuse,” Ms. Wallace said. “Their experiences have a tremendous chilling effect on the large undocumented community in the Roaring Fork Valley and the state. The message being sent to this community is that if you are being abused, don’t call the police.”

According to Mr. Silverstein: “When GCSD chooses to automatically report domestic violence arrestees to ICE, it thwarts the will of the Colorado legislature, which through strong bi-partisan support, carved out an explicit protection for domestic violence victims to ensure that SB-90 would not deter them from reporting domestic abuse to law enforcement.” The letter posits that the ripple effect of this protection extends directly to abused children, because there is a strong co-occurrence of child abuse in homes plagued by domestic violence. Thus, often the call reporting domestic violence is law enforcement’s gateway into learning about and stopping child abuse.

“During the course of our investigation, we were gratified that several counties – when they learned why SB-90s domestic violence exception is essential to encouraging domestic violence reporting – were readily willing to change their policies to reflect the values of Coloradoans’,” said Ms. Wallace.

“Jefferson County, Mesa County, and Hinsdale County are just a few of those counties that were receptive to ACLU advocacy, and we commend them taking this step to ensure the undocumented community feels safe contacting the police to complain of domestic abuse. Negotiations with several other counties are ongoing. Given the receptivity of these counties, and the strong evidence that GCSD has referred domestic violence victims to ICE, we were surprised and dismayed that GCSD is unwilling to alter its policy.”

On Sunday, May 20th, 2012 over 100 MOSES leaders actioned to hold Wayne County Sheriff Benny N. Napoleon accountable for the actions of his officers and deputies and demand that they stop impounding cars and arresting undocumented immigrants who merely have expired licenses.  In the plaza of Ste. Annes Catholic Church, the action was lead by undocumented immigrants of Wayne County, where Detroit is located.

Wayne County Sheriff Benny N. Napoleon commended the work of MOSES and its committed leadership, and committed to work with MOSES to create a racial profiling training for all of his deputies in the entire county. Sheriff Napoleon also committed publicly to allow his deputies and officers to use discretion with undocumented immigrants starting today by submitting a brief to his deputies througout the county – that hardworking business owners, mothers, students, etc, no longer must be detained merely for not having proper documentation.

Great victory for MOSES and immigrants in Wayne Country. This is incredible. This is how we alter the future of Detroit!

J. Michael Tasse, Oragnizer, MOSES

Alabama state lawmakers must stop making futile attempts to revise their anti-immigrant law, HB56, and their only recourse is to repeal it, the Fair Immigration Reform Movement said today.

“The tinkering, tweaking and toying with HB56 does not address its underlying flaws of totally violating the civil rights of undocumented immigrants in Alabama,” said Rich Stolz, Interim Director of FIRM, a network of community-based immigrant advocacy organizations in 30 states. “Gov. Robert Bentley today sent the bill back for reconsideration. He correctly objected to parts of it, but Bentley must show his constituents that he will stand up for Alabama’s reputation and economy and call on the bill’s total repeal.”

Yesterday, the Republican controlled Senate passed a so called ‘tweak bill’ that made the law even harsher.  The bill includes a sweetheart deal for large businesses in the state concerned about complying with employee verification requirements, and they changed language to try to prevent the detention of more foreign business executives. Bentley objected to the part of the bill that changed the way public schools collect information from students, saying he did not want kids asked about their parents’ legal status. He also objected to the provision requiring the Department of Homeland Security to post a quarterly list of the names of any undocumented immigrant who appears in court for a violation of state law, regardless of whether they were convicted.

Bentley did not go far enough in his objections, and his actions today are small consolation to farmers desperate to find workers or businesses and residents concerned about the impact HB56 has had on the state’s reputation.  These changes, if anything, only exacerbate worries over racial profiling, undermine trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities, encourage vigilante harassment and send a message that immigrants, or anyone that looks like one, is unwelcome in Alabama.

“States like Alabama and Arizona have shown a complete unwillingness to enact fair immigration laws and as the Supreme Court weighs its decision on Arizona’s SB1070, the high court must be mindful of how much damage state lawmakers can do when allowed to set policies that clearly violate the civil rights of citizens,” Stolz added.

(WASHINGTON)—The Fair Immigration Reform Movement, a network of community-based immigrant advocacy organizations in 30 states, today commended Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) for fighting to stop the deportation of a South Carolina man. Gutierrez’s efforts on behalf of Gabino Sanchez have helped keep Sanchez with his family while he works to resolve his case with immigration officials.

Sanchez, 27, has lived in the United States since he left his native Mexico when he was 14. Sanchez came to the U.S. to work and send money to his family. He is a construction and landscape worker from Ridgeland, S.C. He is married and has two children, both American citizens. Sanchez had been arrested for driving without a license, a misdemeanor.

Yet immigration officials had targeted Sanchez for deportation although the Obama Administration had directed federal officials to review more than 300,000 cases currently in deportation proceedings to identify low-priority individuals whose cases could be closed because they had strong ties to the United States and they posed no threat to society.

Today, Rep. Gutierrez and Mr. Sanchez had the support of hundreds of North Carolina residents who gathered at the immigration courthouse in Charlotte.

“We thank Rep. Gutierrez for working on behalf of Sanchez and his family, to keep them together,” said Rich Stolz, FIRM interim director. “The lengthy fight to keep Mr. Sanchez with his family in the United States is an example of how the prosecutorial discretion policy announced by the Obama Administration last year has fallen short of expectations in the immigrant and Latino community. This is only one example of thousands who deserve to stay with their loved ones.”

I remember a middle aged man, standing in his doorway, pleading with me to help him get gangs out of his neighborhood, shrunken with fear but desperate to protect his family. I remember a mother walking me through her basement apartment. Water six inches deep in places. She showed me the holes where the rats came in, and where her daughter’s crib was, and explained that her landlord charged her $800 cash every month for these luxury accommodations.

I remember the fear and the desperation these people experienced, and I remember how it felt when we won those issues, and those leaders could feel safe again.

But when I am really down, I remember Elena.

Elena was a great neighborhood leader. She came to the organization because of our work in schools. She had two little boys attending kindergarten and first grade. They were both in overcrowded classrooms, finding it hard to learn, and Elena wanted to do something about that.

When she found out about the work we were doing it was like a light turned on for her. You could see her quickly grasp the dynamics of power, the importance of community. She already knew how to work hard, and she was fearless. In no time she was helping with planning, fundraising, meeting with powerful people. I had hopes she would join the board, maybe even take the thing over one day.

Then she came to a meeting with a black eye.

Everyone pretended not to see it. Everyone averted their eyes. But you could feel the tension. Elena, true to form, didn’t shirk. She ran the meeting well, drove us to conclusions and even led the evaluation, critiquing herself along with others, always striving to do better.

I waited for her after the meeting. Asked her if she was OK. She didn’t even bother to pretend. “Do I look OK?” she asked. I offered to help her. “What help can you give me Gabe? I don’t have papers remember? He says if I run away he will tell la migra (slang for immigration authorities). I’ll be deported and my boys will have to stay here with him.”

I didn’t know what to do, but promised I would look into it. And she went home. Over the next few weeks, many of the people who had been at that meeting came and talked about what they had seen. Some offered to help her, some to hide her. Some of the men at the meeting offered to, ah, talk to her husband. But always the same response. And then what? She doesn’t have papers remember?

You see, this was before the Violence Against Women Act was passed by Congress in 1994 and reauthorized in 2000 and 2005. The law was improved over the years which added protections for some immigrant women in danger of domestic violence. But that law and those improvements didn’t exist then for Elena. And so we could not help her. She had to go home.

And now the law is up for renewal AGAIN. But people like Rep. Sandy Adams (R-Fla.), Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), are playing political games with the lives of women like Elena.

You see, for people like these Republicans, immigrant women, if they don’t have papers, are not worthy of protection, are not worthy of help. In fact, these women would be put in further danger of abuse under their bill, HR 4970.

The House proposal endangers victims and perpetuates further abuse. It would even allow abusive partners in domestic violence cases to provide input as to whether their victim should qualify for immigration relief. Abusers who could have adjusted the immigration status of their spouse and chose not to as a tool of abuse and fear will be in a position to block the victim’s access to this critical remedy for battered immigrants. Informing and allowing alleged abusers to provide input in these cases puts victims at risk of retaliation.

I wonder what Republicans who support HR 4970 would do if they were faced with someone like Elena. Would they display the same kind of courage that she did every day I knew her? Would they be honest about their bigotry, explain how women’s lives were being used as political footballs? I doubt it. I think they would hide behind platitudes and false patriotism. I think they would avoid looking at her face, mumble something about rule of law, and retreat to their comfortable, safe, office, or their comfortable, safe, home.

The last time I saw Elena was about six weeks after that meeting. I saw her at school, picking up her boys. I asked her where she had been. It had been weeks since she was at a meeting. She shrugged. “We lived in a car for two days, but I could not do that to my boys anymore, so I went home. My husband doesn’t like me going to the meetings anymore.” Once again I tried to convince her to get help, explained she had the whole neighborhood in her corner. The answer was still the same. “Y que?” And then? She knew we couldn’t protect her from immigration officials. There was no VAWA, there was no safety.

I never saw Elena again. Except when I’m feeling down. Then I see her face clear as day.

In 1994 they wrote VAWA, and in 2012 some leaders in the Senate and the House showed enough courage to make sure VAWA reauthorization protected women like Elena. And, despite all the best efforts of people like Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) to have a vote on her bill, HR 4271, the limited Republican version of VAWA is up for reauthorization right now. I cannot stress enough the importance of passage of Gwen Moore’s bill. Please, take a second and contact House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor and demand they allow improvements to their dangerous bill when it reaches the House floor tomorrow. I know I will.

This was originally published by Fox News Latino.

The Fair Immigration Reform Movement, a network of community-based immigrant advocacy organizations in 30 states, said other lawmakers, including the Supreme Court, must take heed that violating the civil rights of all people will not be tolerated.

“Arpaio has racially discriminated, racially profiled and openly violated the civil rights of immigrants for years and it is time he pays for these egregious misdeeds,” said Deepak Bhargava, Executive Director of the Center for Community Change, a FIRM member. “The fact that Arpaio’s state enacted a vehemently anti-immigrant ‘show me your papers’ law shows that the Supreme Court must strike down the law before other law enforcement officials and politicians like Arpaio continue his practices.”

“Arpaio has shown a total willingness to use his power for all the wrong reasons: to punish hardworking people who come to this country to make better lives for themselves and their families,” said Petra Falcon, Executive Director of Promise Arizona, also a FIRM member. “I hope the Supreme Court follows the Justice Department’s lead and strikes down Arizona’s anti-immigration law.”

Congratulations to the Black Immigration Network (BIN) for their recent conference in Atlanta. Several organizations from the Fair Immigration Reform Movement participated.  BIN will continue to be an important resource and space for alliance building within the broader immigrant rights and progressive movements.

     - Francesca Menes, Florida Immigrant Coalition

Below is a blog post link on the Black Immigration Network 3rd National Conference.

http://ht.ly/aIlKA

Over 100 days after first issuing a report which found Arpaio’s Maricopa Country Sheriff’s Office to be in violation of civil rights laws, DOJ has sent a letter telling Arpaio that they have concluded that an agreement “cannot be secured through voluntary means.” DOJ is required under the law to notify a party before they sue them in court.

DOJ said in a letter to Arpaio last month that they didn’t believe the issue could be settledthrough negotiations.

This was originally published by Talking Points Memo.

Thousands upon thousands of US-born citizens will likely spend this Mother’s Day facing an uncertain future and a broken family.  According to a March ICE report, 46,486 parents of US-born citizens were deported from the United States during the first half of 2011.  In contrast, the New York Times reports that in the decade between 1998 and 2007, nearly 100,000 such parents were deported.  An estimated 4 million US-born children have a least one parent who is an unauthorized immigrant.

“We are looking at the fruits of an untenable system that continues to rot.  Families with deep roots in the community, hard-working men and women, entire communities are compromised by the blind enforcement machinery that this Administration has failed to stop, despite their continued assurances that more humane policies are forthcoming,” stated Angelica Salas, executive director for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.

The rate of humane decision-making by ICE in at least 300,000 deportation cases clogging up the immigration court system has been so dismal, that watchdog Family Unity Commissions have been established in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, New York, North Carolina, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Los Angeles Commission member, Jessica Dominguez, stated:  “It is urgent that we work together to find justice for these families and their US-born citizens.  America is the country where these families have flourished and where they hope their children will be happy.  Why make these families pay the huge toll of banishment?”

Rosemary Allegra, an American of Italian descent, just learned that her friend Carmen has been wearing an electronic ankle bracelet during the past 8 months and may soon be deported.  “It makes me angry to know she has been treated this way.  This is for bad people and by God she is not a bad person.  Her family is very loving, hard-working, and they have reared their children the right way, trying to live the American way,” she adds.

As to the Commission’s urgent petition to keep families together, “Our request is for humane policies to be adhered-to and it has nothing to do with election-year politics.  We have to care more about human life and family unity than political survival and party harmony,” said Ms. Salas.