Systemic racism is rooted in immigration laws — it can no longer be ignored

 BY KEVIN R. JOHNSON AND KARLA MCKANDERS, OPINION CONTRIBUTORS

© Getty Images

Following the police killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and other African Americans, the United States engaged in an extended national discussion — peppered by public protests in cities across the nation — about eradicating systemic racism directed at African Americans, Latinos and others by law enforcement. Systemic racism also deeply afflicts U.S. immigration law and its enforcement, a longstanding practice that has been documented by scholars.  

The American Bar Association (ABA), the largest national organization of lawyers, has called for an investigation by the U.S. government into the influence of racism and xenophobia on the enforcement of immigration laws. This is a stunning development by a mainstream group of lawyers; the ABA’s actions warrant our full attention.    

The ABA House of Delegates passed Resolution 610, which: “Urges the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Health and Human Services, to identify and eradicate actual and perceived racial bias, discrimination, and xenophobia in the enforcement of the Immigration and Nationality Act.”   

Many noncitizens within and seeking to come to the United States are people of color from the developing world who are directly affected by the comprehensive federal immigration law. That law employs the terms “alien” to legitimize harsh treatment. Those deemed as aliens are subject to discrimination that never could be lawful with respect to U.S. citizens, including detention and removal from the country. A report submitted by the ABA Commission on Immigration in support of the resolution offers many examples of how immigrants of color have been injured by racial bias in enforcement.  

The need to address racism in this area should not be especially surprising. Historically, racism has deeply influenced immigration and immigration enforcement.  

The first comprehensive federal immigration law was forged by virulent racism against Chinese immigrants. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 prohibited the immigration of most Chinese people to the United States.  

From 1792 to 1952, being white was a prerequisite for the naturalization of immigrants.  

Passed by Congress in 1924, the discriminatory national origins quotas system, which remained in place until 1965, favored immigration from Northern Europe and greatly restricted the migration of people of color to the United States.  

In 1954, the U.S. government removed hundreds of thousands of persons of Mexican ancestry from the country in an initiative officially known as “Operation Wetback.”  

That racism, unfortunately, is not simply just a part of history. Donald Trump kicked off his successful 2016 presidential campaign by referring to Mexican immigrants as “criminals” and “rapists.” As president, he crudely said the United States should not allow noncitizens from “shithole” countries such as Haiti and El Salvador to remain in the United States, issued three versions of the Muslim ban, put in place a policy of separating Central American parents and children and much more.    

Although President Trump’s racial vitriol was unlike that of any other modern president, others pursued policies similar to his. More than 90 percent of the record 400,000-plus noncitizens removed from the country during the Obama years were from Latin America. It was under President Biden’s watch that Haitian migrants on the U.S./Mexico border were chased on horseback by Border Patrol officers and immediately returned to Haiti. And Biden has continued Title 42 mass expulsions of migrants from the Trump era, a decision that led former Yale Law Dean Harold Koh to resign from a post in the State Department. 

Moreover, the ordinary operation of the U.S. immigration removal system reflects no less than systemic racism. The Supreme Court has held that “Mexican appearance” may be considered by Border Patrol officers in making immigration stops, a move that has contributed to racial profiling in ordinary immigration enforcement. Moreover, police reliance on racial profiling of Blacks and Latinos in routine criminal law enforcement leads to disparate arrests of Black and Latino immigrants. Racial profiling in turn feeds noncitizens of color directly into the immigration removal system. It, therefore, should be no surprise that year in and year out Latinos and Blacks are severely overrepresented in the noncitizens removed from the United States.  

Resolution 610 was one of several ABA resolutions approved relating to immigration. Resolution 609 urged that the U.S. asylum system be reformed to afford persons seeking protection from persecution or torture more transparency, due process of law, access to counsel and full and fair adjudication of any claims to relief. It also calls for the end of the use of Title 42 to block and expel asylum-seekers at the U.S. border. Resolution 608 advocates for steps to facilitate the provision of speedy relief to Afghan refugees.    

The three resolutions aim to bring a semblance of racial justice to U.S. immigration law and its enforcement. Recognition of systemic racism in the immigration system by lawyers as a group — not just immigration lawyers — is a tremendous step forward.  

As part of the overall agenda to eliminate systemic racism from U.S. social life, we as a nation must strive to do the same in immigration enforcement.  

Kevin R. Johnson is dean and Mabie/Apallas professor of Public Interest Law and Chicanx Studies at UC Davis School of Law. He is the author of Systemic Racism in the U.S. Immigration Laws 97 Indiana Law Journal (forthcoming 2022). Karla McKanders is a Clinical professor of Law at Vanderbilt Law School. 

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

The left's South Texas star isn't the progressive they warned you about

 By SARAH FERRIS

LAREDO, Texas — If Jessica Cisneros topples Henry Cuellar in next week’s Democratic primary here, it would be a once-in-a-generation shakeup for border district politics — but not quite the victory that progressive activists might have envisioned.

Cuellar wants to saturate the race with some of the same messages that the national GOP has used to smear liberals like Cisneros, warning against a rising left that wants to defund the police and slash border enforcement. But Cisneros is largely depriving her foe of that red meat, running a progressive campaign in a tough district that sounds starkly different from liberal icons like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Bernie Sanders.

Instead, she’s meeting those national attacks with a hyper-local counterpunch, mostly forgoing liberal touchstones like the Green New Deal, Medicare for All and canceling student debt.

Asked about the most conservative House Democrat’s negative — and typically exaggerated — ads blasting her on the police, “open borders” and Border Patrol funding, Cisneros turned the focus back on him: “I think Cuellar is just trying to hit on these points to distract from the fact that he’s under an FBI investigation.”

Jessica Cisneros takes a picture with a supporter during the Laredo WBCA Parade in Laredo, Texas on Feb. 19. | Sarah Ferris

The national progressive movement will eagerly embrace Cisneros if she can defeat Cuellar next week, and many liberals would greet a primary win as a new path to taking down more centrist Democratic incumbents. Still, her campaign is much more focused on kitchen table issues like jobs and health care costs than on the ambitious vision that high-profile progressives are pushing for on Capitol Hill.

To hear Cisneros tell it, she’s simply talking about the most critical issues in a sprawling border community where nearly one-third of people live below the poverty line.

“I think people have this preconceived notion of what it means to be running as a progressive,” Cisneros, an immigration attorney based in Laredo, said in an interview. “It’s health care and jobs. That’s literally our bread and butter, and what we’re talking about at the doors.”

If someone does bring up climate to her, Cisneros has a set response: “Yeah, it’s really important to me, too, but the way that we get people excited about addressing the climate crisis is, ‘This is a jobs program,’” she said.

Of course, she’s also prepared to knock Cuellar personally in a city where it seems most people are aware of last month’s FBI raid of the sitting congressman’s home and personal office.

Cuellar is also a classic villain for the left — a career politician who earns a top rating from the NRA, takes campaign checks from oil and gas and is one of the last anti-abortion Democrats in Congress. But it’s still a South Texas seat, and Cisneros and her team know she’ll likely need to win over voters who back him on at least some of those more conservative positions.

While the newly redrawn district will be slightly better for Democrats in 2022, President Joe Biden would only have won it by 7 points — making it much more competitive than the solid blue districts of the so-called Squad.

“I think people have this preconceived notion of what it means to be running as a progressive,” Cisneros, an immigration attorney based in Laredo, said in an interview. “It’s health care and jobs. That’s literally our bread and butter, and what we’re talking about at the doors.”

If someone does bring up climate to her, Cisneros has a set response: “Yeah, it’s really important to me, too, but the way that we get people excited about addressing the climate crisis is, ‘This is a jobs program,’” she said.

Of course, she’s also prepared to knock Cuellar personally in a city where it seems most people are aware of last month’s FBI raid of the sitting congressman’s home and personal office.

Cuellar is also a classic villain for the left — a career politician who earns a top rating from the NRA, takes campaign checks from oil and gas and is one of the last anti-abortion Democrats in Congress. But it’s still a South Texas seat, and Cisneros and her team know she’ll likely need to win over voters who back him on at least some of those more conservative positions.

While the newly redrawn district will be slightly better for Democrats in 2022, President Joe Biden would only have won it by 7 points — making it much more competitive than the solid blue districts of the so-called Squad.

Rep. Henry Cuellar speaks on southern border security and illegal immigration during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol on July 30. | Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Cisneros’ overriding campaign message is straightforward: Cuellar has been in power too long. It’s a populist, anti-establishment energy that clearly resonates with some voters in a city dominated by his family’s politics. The bigger question is whether they can be convinced to vote for her.

One of her campaign’s volunteers, David Villalobos, often tells the same story to people when he’s door-knocking around the city. He says he remembers when Cuellar used to visit his elementary school, but now, as he said to one mom at her front gate, “I feel like he’s forgotten where he’s came from.”

“A lot of people don’t believe in voting but we’re trying to change that narrative,” he said to another mom, who was appalled by the FBI cloud hanging over Cuellar. But she said she hasn’t voted in past elections.

“What’s the point?” the woman said, before adding of Cisneros: “Maybe we do need her.”

Knocking on nearly 100 doors last Saturday, Villalobos spoke about two main problems facing the community: prescription drugs costing so much that people have to go to Mexico to afford them and the need for more jobs in Laredo, so young people don’t have to leave for bigger cities like San Antonio.

But while Cisneros and her team rarely lean into her most progressive positions, Cuellar tries to steer her into them whenever he can. He believes that Cisneros’ celebrity visitors like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) benefit him far more than her.

“They’re out of touch with my district. I think that actually helps me,” Cuellar said, scoffing at what he called the “out of town” endorsements from Sen. Sanders (I-Vt.) and other progressive groups, plus her donations from New York and California.

And he and his team are quick to cite Cisneros’ most polarizing statements over the last two years, including a 2019 candidate questionnaire in which she suggested that the U.S. should “split” Immigration and Customs Enforcement in half and “re-assign enforcement functions” to other agencies.

Cuellar ads — which heavily blanket the TV and radio airwaves in the district — go after Cisneros for that exact line, while linking her to the “defund police movement” and “open borders.”

He knows it’s a dangerous attack: The GOP has used it to hammer his own party for years, nearly costing Democrats their majority in 2020. It’s particularly potent in a border community like Laredo, where law enforcement, including border patrol, are critical to survival.

Sylvia Bruni, chair of the Webb County Democratic Party — who does not endorse in primaries — said Cuellar’s attacks have been misleading but acknowledges they could be effective.

“I’ve never seen an outright strategy to defund police,” Bruni said, adding: “They pick that up and they run with it, and it’s very scary ... When you spin that, and you’re knocking on doors, it’s scary.”

In one of her ads, Cisneros does reiterate her support for “Medicare para todos,” explaining how her aunt fought cancer without insurance — part of her strategy to unpack her platform by explaining how it’s all “rooted in economics and job security,” as she later described it.

But four of the five recent ads from her and her supporters are almost entirely focused on Cuellar. The ads highlight the questions surrounding his FBI raid, his donations from drug companies and his rides on donors’ private jets.

Cisneros herself says she’s not concerned whether her campaign can become a blueprint for national liberals or not. The bigger point she wants to make is that with the right mix of progressive policies: “You can even topple an 18-year incumbent.”

In her first campaign two years ago, Cisneros said she and her team would knock on doors and find voters who’d never been directly approached by a politician for their support. As national Democrats fretted anxiously in 2020 that they were losing ground in South Texas, Cisneros said the simple solution was showing up for people.

“I want people to know this is what happens when you don’t take people for granted, and you actually ask for their input, have them volunteer, be a part of this campaign.”

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Rick Scott's 'Plan to Rescue America' includes promise to name border wall after Trump

 BY DOMINICK MASTRANGELO

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) has crafted an 11-point plan laying out what the agenda should be for Republicans and conservatives if they retake control of Congress this year and the White House in 2024. 

Scott, the chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, released what he called a plan to "rescue America," which includes a promise to finish a wall along the Southwest border with Mexico and name is after former President Trump. 

"Nations have borders. We should give that a try. President Trump’s plan to build a wall was right. We welcome those who want to join us in building the American dream, immigrants who want to be Americans, not change America," a slide deck featuring the plan reads. "We are a stronger nation because we are a nation of immigrants; but immigration without assimilation makes us weaker. Politicians from both parties talk big about border security and do nothing. We are done with that." 

The plan also calls on Republican leaders to "strip all federal funding from 'sanctuary cities' and prosecute any elected officials who flout our immigration laws." 

Scott has been working with other party leaders to craft the Republican message ahead of this year's mid-term elections and has met with Trump at least once since the former president left office. 

Trump's endorsements of Republican primary candidates in races in several states is widely seen as pivotal as he ponders his own political future. 

“I want to be an additive, I want us all to row the boats in the same direction,” Scott said of Trump during an interview last March. “My goal is to tell the [former] president what I’m doing. I’ve talked to him, and he tells me he wants to be helpful to me. He’s committed to Republicans taking back a majority in the U.S. Senate.”

Scott's plan was widely praised by Republican allies and mocked by Democrats on Twitter. 

"Raise taxes on half of Americans, including seniors and working families," White House Rapid Response Director Mike Gwin said in a tweet. "Literally nothing on how to lower prices for working families." 

"Joe Biden and Democrats have made life more expensive and less safe for families across America," said Republican National Committee Chairman Ronna McDaniel in a statement. "Republicans like Senator Rick Scott have real solutions to put us back on track. From lowering costs and creating jobs, to supporting police and securing the border, Republicans are offering a clear plan to protect and reinvigorate the America we know and love.”

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Officials probe fatal shooting by Border Patrol agent over weekend

 BY MONIQUE BEALS

© Getty

Federal and local authorities are investigating after a U.S. Border Patrol agent shot and killed a man in Arizona late Saturday night a few miles from the U.S.-Mexico border. 

“Early indications are that one male subject, presumed to be an illegal immigrant, was fatally wounded by a Border Patrol agent who was on duty with additional personnel,” the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office said, according to The Associated Press.

The sheriff's office added that other people in the area were detained “for interview purposes and further processing.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman John Mennell confirmed to the AP on Monday that the agency would work alongside the sheriff’s office for the probe. 

The shooting was reported in "difficult terrain" about 30 miles northeast of the Arizona town of Douglas around 10 p.m. on Saturday, the wire service added. 

The Hill has reached out to U.S. Customs and Border Protection and to the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office for more information.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Biden administration proposes eliminating barriers in 'public charge' rule

 BY NATHANIEL WEIXEL

© Getty images

The Biden administration is proposing a more "fair and humane" version of the "public charge" rule that would eliminate many of the barriers imposed by the Trump administration on noncitizens seeking to qualify for legal status.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Thursday proposed a much narrower definition of which public benefits an immigrant may potentially be dependent on, which the government can use to determine whether that person should be admitted into the country.

The Trump administration in 2019 expanded the definition of "public charge" to make it much easier for immigration officials to deny entry or legal status to people likely to rely on government assistance. 

“The 2019 public charge rule was not consistent with our nation’s values,” DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement. “Under this proposed rule, we will return to the historical understanding of the term ‘public charge’ and individuals will not be penalized for choosing to access the health benefits and other supplemental government services available to them.”

Under current regulations put in place in 1996, the term “public charge” is defined as someone who is “primarily dependent” on government assistance, meaning that the government supplies more than half their income. Congress in the 1996 welfare reform law indicated that the availability of public benefits should not be an incentive for immigration into the United States.

The Trump administration expanded the rule to say that anyone who needed benefits like Medicaid, food stamps, or housing vouchers for more than 12 months were considered a “public charge” and were more likely to be denied a green card. 

That policy is no longer in effect.

In the proposal, the DHS cited experts who said the rule put a chilling effect on people who weren't directly affected, and discouraged permanent residents and even U.S. citizens from using benefits like medical care over concerns it might keep them from obtaining legal status.

"It caused many noncitizens to be fearful of accessing benefits that Congress intended them to have," the DHS said in the proposal.  

In a change, the Biden administration said it aims to focus primarily on cash benefits. Unlike the Trump administration, the DHS said it no longer intends to consider noncash benefits, like food assistance, Medicaid benefits, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, housing benefits and transportation vouchers.

The use of disaster or pandemic assistance, Social Security, government pensions and other earned benefits will also not be considered. 

The new proposal will have a 60-day public comment period, the DHS said. 

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Poll: 70 percent of Americans support a path to citizenship

 BY RAFAEL BERNAL

A large majority of Americans support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, according to a new NewsNation poll.

The poll found that 70 percent of respondents support a pathway to citizenship, while 30 percent oppose it. Among women, support was slightly higher at 72 percent.

Most recent immigration reform initiatives have centered around granting legal avenues for undocumented immigrants to get legal status.

The last time a broad legalization measure became law was in 1986, although some smaller bills have passed since.

House Democrats last year included a provision that would grant around 7 million undocumented immigrants legal status - but in most cases not a pathway to citizenship - in the Build Back Better bill that was supposed to be President Biden's signature legislation.

And the House passed a bipartisan measure that would provide a path to citizenship for millions of undocumented farmworkers.

But neither path has a realistic path to Senate approval, and both have been sidelined with leaders focusing on other issues.

Still, according to the NewsNation poll, 87 percent of Americans think immigration is an important political issue.

Nearly half say it is a very important political issue, and only two percent think immigration is not at all important.

While the poll shows most Americans agree undocumented immigrants should have a path to citizenship and that immigration matters, divisions exist on most other immigration questions.

Slightly more than 37 percent of respondents said immigration should decrease, nearly 25 percent said it should increase and another 37 percent said immigration should stay the same.

Similarly, 20 percent of respondents said they want the government to decrease border security spending focused on immigration, while 48 percent said spending should increase and 31 percent said it should remain the same. 

Americans are split on the effectiveness of a border wall to contain irregular migration, with 51 percent of respondents saying it would be effective and 49 percent saying it would not. 

The poll was conducted by Decision Desk HQ at the request of NewsNation among 1,037 U.S. adults, with a margin of error of around 3 percent on most questions.

NewsNation and The Hill are both part of Nexstar Media Group.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Democrats call on Biden to address 'disparate and often inhumane treatment' of Black migrants

 BY CAROLINE VAKIL

Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) are among a group of more than100 Democrats calling on President Biden to address and review the treatment of Black migrants within the United States' immigration system.

The Democratic lawmakers wrote a letter to the president dated Wednesday in which they said Black migrants were facing "disparate and often inhumane treatment" within the immigration enforcement process, pointing specifically to Haitian migrants as an example.

"In September 2021, as large numbers of Haitians entered the United States at the Texas border at Del Rio, we saw disturbing images and videos of border patrol agents using horses and horse reins against Black people at the border-who were carrying nothing but food and water," the lawmakers wrote. 

"For many, this incident conjured images of our country's treatment towards enslaved Black people and highlighted longstanding concerns regarding the disparate treatment of Black migrants by immigration enforcement officials," they added.

Biden called the images "outrageous" in September, adding, "I promise you, those people will pay. There is an investigation underway right now and there will be consequences."

The lawmakers specifically called on Biden to end the use of Title 42, a public health authority that can prevent migrants from seeking asylum by expelling them from the U.S. 

"It is time to undo the United States' draconian immigration policies, particularly policies introduced under the Trump Administration, such as the use of Title 42, that circumvent our humanitarian obligations," the lawmakers wrote.

They added that they wanted the departments of Justice and Homeland Security to also do a review of the treatment of Black migrants within the immigration system.

"As a starting point, we recommend the Department of Homeland Security, in concert with the Department of Justice's Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), conduct a wholistic review of the disparate treatment of Black migrants throughout our immigration system, make available to the public the results of this review and take steps to remedy disparities at each step of the immigration enforcement process," the lawmaker said.

"It is essential that we recommit ourselves to reversing anti-Black policies, including by adopting a human-rights centered approach to supporting immigrants and people seeking asylum in the United States."

A White House spokesperson, Vedant Patel, told The New York Times on Wednesday that "we continue to defer to the C.D.C. on its use" of Title 42 and added that, regardless of someone's country of origin, immigration laws are enforced "across the board."

The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Grassroots groups 'dismayed by lack of leadership' from Hispanic Caucus on immigration

 BY RAFAEL BERNAL 

A coalition of grassroots immigrant groups and advocates are calling on the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) to push for immigration reform, after the group failed to embrace the issue in congressional negotiations last year.

In an open letter to the CHC, 31 groups led by Angelica Salas, president of the CHIRLA Action Fund and Gustavo Torres, president of CASA in Action, bemoaned the role of Hispanic Democrats in immigration policy negotiations leading up to the House vote on the Build Back Better bill (BBB).

"We remain greatly disappointed that, during the last year, as various interests sought inclusion in President Biden’s Build Back Better plan — legislation that was proposed as a budget reconciliation bill that would not require a 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate — champions for immigration solutions were few,” wrote Salas and Torres.

In the lead-up to the vote on BBB, which cleared the House in November, various plans were proposed to include some form of relief for undocumented immigrants in the bill.

Senate members of the CHC explicitly called on their House counterparts to include broad provisions to update the registry date for undocumented immigrants – essentially signing off on a statute of limitations that would allow undocumented immigrants in the country since before 2010 to apply for legal status.

But House negotiators pared down that request to a parole option, which would grant temporary relief to undocumented immigrants, and which CHC senators said put them in a more difficult negotiating position in the upper chamber.

While grassroots advocates decried that compromise, some key members of the CHC like Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D) pointed to the fact that the House passed BBB and a slew of other immigration proposals that haven’t cleared the Senate.

“I don't know why CHC members and Dem House members take flak for the Senate or White House. We did our job -- the best available options for BBB and stand-alone legislation all sent to the Senate by House Dems. It's time others did their jobs,” said Grijalva.

Still, the letter's writers compared the CHC's role in representing immigrants to the Congressional Black Caucus's role in fighting for voting rights, drawing an unfavorable comparison for the CHC in terms of expending political capital on the issue.

“Indeed, while your colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus were heroically battling for passage of voting rights legislation, in memory of the great Rep. John Lewis, who also fought for immigrants’ rights, we were dismayed by the lack of leadership from most of the 38 members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus,” they wrote.

That disparity enraged immigration advocates, particularly as only three members of the CHC – Reps. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), Lou Correa (D-Calif.) and Jesús García (D-Ill.) – threatened to withhold their votes if sufficient immigration provisions were not included in the bill.

"The bill was in the House. It's where we have the majority. It's where we have the power, in the House. If the House sends a message that we really don't ----ing care, how do you think it makes [Sen.] Bob Menendez's [(D-N.J.)] and [Sen. Catherine] Cortez Masto's [(D-Nev.)] job? It makes it harder for them," said former Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.), who for years led the CHC's immigration efforts.

Gutiérrez said the letter is a necessary appeal to a CHC that is uniquely positioned to provide political representation to immigrants.

"It's about time that somebody spoke up. What we're doing is pleading. Please. If not you then who?" said Gutiérrez.

"If you remain silent don't expect anyone to stand up for millions and millions of people who live every day in fear. I hope this moment stands as a wake up call to my former colleagues in the Hispanic Congressional Caucus to step up: it's your turn at the plate, it's your turn at the plate."

The letter will be displayed in The Hill Wednesday in a full-page ad funded by CHIRLA Action Fund, CASA in Action, and ABIC-Action.

CHC Chairman Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.) received the letter Tuesday, saying "there is an incredible sense of the urgency of now to pass immigration reform, especially during this pandemic when immigrant essential workers bore the brunt of the pandemic in supporting our nation."

“We remain committed to continuing to work hand-in-hand with national immigration and Hispanic advocacy leaders who have been good partners at every step of the way to provide urgently-needed protections and relief for 11 million hardworking immigrant essential workers," said Ruiz.

"Just last week, we met with leading advocacy groups to advance these shared goals. We will continue to use every tool at our disposal — legislative and executive — to pass immigration reform," he added.

The advocacy leaders who signed the letter have historically relied on the CHC to take their agenda to Capitol Hill, with few other political groups willing to invest in coalitions that largely represent a constituency heavy in non-voters.

“The Congressional Hispanic Caucus, regardless of the specific districts individual members represent, is the voice for Latinos across the country,” said Torres, the head of CASA, in a statement. “We come to you from a place of deep love and respect for your leadership to underscore that we need you, day and night, to be the champions for undocumented farmworkers in Delmarva, poultry workers in Georgia, domestic workers in Seattle and their families and communities.”

While the letter is severely critical of the CHC's role in BBB, it opens the door for House Hispanic Democrats to realign with grassroots immigration advocates.

“We recognize your efforts since the start of the Biden-Harris Administration, but they have not resulted in the passage of any permanent protections. What we now ask is for your fierce leadership to complete action this year on legislation to create pathways to citizenship for the undocumented,”

The publication of the letter exhibits a growing rift within the larger immigration movement and within Hispanic power structures, with Democratic members and party-aligned advocacy groups on one side, and grassroots and immigrant legal aid groups on the other.

That rift was laid bare as García, Correa and Espaillat publicly made their case to include and expand immigrant protections in BBB, while Democrats who fought to constrain those provisions didn't face public scrutiny.

Gutiérrez blamed the CHC's unwillingness to go to the mattresses on immigration on distractions brought on by loftier political aspirations.

"The first promise I made to myself was that I would never aspire to be a U.S. senator. I would never aspire to be a governor. I would never aspire beyond Congress of the United States. I would never let those aspirations dilute my passion, my commitment for fairness and justice for immigrants. Never. I think people have to do their jobs. The job they have today," said Gutiérrez.

Updated: 7:56 p.m. 

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

More Americans dissatisfied with immigration level: Gallup

 BY RAFAEL BERNAL

Dissatisfaction with current immigration levels spiked in January as dissatisfaction among Republican respondents surged in Gallup's periodic Mood of the Nation poll.

According to the poll, 58 percent of all Americans are dissatisfied with current immigration levels.

Of that group, 35 percent of respondents want immigration levels decreased, 9 percent say they want levels increased and 14 percent say they are dissatisfied with current levels but they don't want immigration levels to increase or decrease.

The number of respondents who said they want decreased immigration rose sharply from 2021, when only 19 percent of respondents said they wanted reduced immigration, the lowest level since Gallup started asking the question in 2001.

January's 35 percent number is the highest since 2017, which followed a peak in anti-immigration sentiment in 2016.

The rise in immigration dissatisfaction was almost entirely driven by Republican respondents, 87 percent of whom said they are dissatisfied with current levels of immigration.

That level is the highest ever recorded by Gallup, and a significant jump from 2021, when only 19 percent of Republicans said they were dissatisfied with current immigration levels.

Among Democrats, 40 percent said they're dissatisfied with current levels, a drop from 47 percent in 2021; 55 percent of independents said they're dissatisfied, up from 49 percent in 2021.

The partisan split is also clear in the number of dissatisfied respondents who say immigration should increase, decrease or remain the same.

Among Republicans, only 3 percent are dissatisfied and say immigration levels should increase, while 69 percent say levels should decrease, a significant jump from 2021, when only 40 percent Republicans called for immigration reductions.

Democrats saw a similar shift, with 15 percent saying they are dissatisfied and want higher levels of immigration, down from 28 percent the two years prior.

Still, 52 percent of Democrats said they're satisfied with current levels, and only 11 percent said they want to see reduced immigration.

And nearly a third of independents, 32 percent, say they are dissatisfied with current levels and want to see less immigration, while 34 percent say they are content with current levels.

While dissatisfaction with current levels of immigration surged, it's unclear whether Americans by and large know how many people enter the country - legally or illegally - every year.

Still, immigration news during President Biden's first year in office was driven by images and reports of encounters with migrants at the border.

Last year saw record numbers of encounters between U.S. officials and migrants at the southern border, but most researchers agree that the number of undocumented migrants making it into the country is at a historical low.

Research by the Migration Policy Institute found that in fiscal 2021, around half a million migrants successfully entered the United States, despite the 1.7 million encounters between migrants and officials at the border and ports of entry.

In 2000, a comparable year for unauthorized border crossing attempts, more than 2 million people are estimated to have successfully made their way into the United States.

And while legal immigration numbers for 2021 have not yet been released, immigration to the United States took a dip with the pandemic in 2020 and most likely did not recover the following year.

In 2018 and 2019, the U.S. government issued about 1 million legal permanent resident permits - also known as green cards - and only issued slightly more than 700,000 in 2020.

The trend likely continued in 2021, as the Biden administration failed to deliver more than 200,000 green cards authorized by Congress due to slowdowns caused by the pandemic and restructuring after the Trump administration.

The Gallup poll interviewed 811 adults in all 50 states, with a margin of error or plus minus 4 percentage points at a 95 percent confidence level. 

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html