The Select Board has thrown its support behind a resolution critical of a federal immigration enforcement program and the town’s participation in it – and now Town Meeting will weigh in on the matter. Residents concerned about the Se Communities Act sought to pass the resolution but town officials said the measure could jeopardize state and federal police grants. Town Manager John Musante worked with town counsel Kopelman & Paige to come up with a revised version of the resolution, which states the town’s intention to not participate in federal law enforcement programs related to immigration enforcement. The Select Board Monday unanimously supported the resolution. “It does reflect what Amherst is about,” said Select Board member Aaron Hayden. Ruth Hooke of Precinct 8, who drafted the original version, said she is satisfied with the revision. The intention of the article is to counter the Se Communities program run by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which supporte
The announcement came just in time for Mother’s Day: Se Communities, the arbitrary and despised Department of Homeland Security program that requires states to identify immigrants for deportation, ed is expected to be activated across New York State, including in New York City, on Tuesday. In a brave gesture Gov. Cuomo, nearly a year ago, unsuccessfully tried to remove the state from the deportation program that is also strongly opposed by law enforcement officials and domestic violence groups across the country. These groups correctly believe Se Communities undermines public safety by compromising the trust between police and the communities they serve, in addition to encouraging racial profiling, separating families and even deports U.S. citizens. Despite the criticism, the calls for reform or for ending it, and Cuomo’s concern, the Obama administration has continued imposing the fundamentally flawed program in blatant disregard of the human cost and dire consequences.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), one of President Barack Obama’s most vocal critics on immigration, was sitting at dinner with his family a couple of weeks ago when his youngest daughter began talking about the president’s “terrible” deportation record. “If they invite us to the White House, I won’t go,” the 24-year-old said, according to Gutierrez. His wife, though, summed up the family’s mixed feelings on the president and immigration. “Yes — but you should clarify that notwithstanding that, we’re all voting for him,” his wife said, according to the congressman. “We can be angry, but we cannot vote for” Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee. To many supporters of immigration reform, Obama has been a major disappointment.
Obama administration officials have announced that a contentious fingerprinting program to identify illegal immigrants will be extended across Massachusetts and New York next week, expanding federal enforcement efforts despite opposition from the governors and immigrant groups in those states. In blunt e-mails sent Tuesday to officials and the police in the two states, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said the program, Se Communities, would be activated “in all remaining jurisdictions” this Tuesday. Last June, Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts declined to sign an agreement with the immigration agency to expand Se Communities beyond a pilot program in the Boston area since 2006. Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York said he wanted to suspend the program, which had already been initiated in a number of counties.
I found last week’s Supreme Court argument in the Arizona immigration case utterly depressing, and I’ve spent the intervening week puzzling over my reaction. It’s not simply that the federal government seems poised to lose: unlike the appeals court, the justices appear likely to find the heart of Arizona’s mean-spirited “attrition through enforcement” statute, S.B. 1070, permissible under federal law.
Poring over the argument transcript and the briefs, what finally came through as most deeply troubling was this: the failure of any participant in the argument, justice or advocate for either side, to affirm the simple humanity of Arizona’s several hundred thousand undocumented residents.
Listening to the oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court on Arizona’s breathing-while-brown law, Senate Bill 1070, prompted a daydream. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Antonin Scalia are in a battered pickup truck with garden tools visible in the back. Set in the midst of Sheriff Joe Arpaio country — as if in an old Twilight Zone episode — the p
A tweak to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Se Communities program, order also known as S-Comm, would allow the agency to withhold placing undocumented immigrants stopped by local law enforcement for traffic violations into deportation proceedings until “conviction for the minor criminal traffic offense.” But the change, introduced following a task force report that recommended changes to S-Comm, still means that undocumented immigrants are at risk for being deported for missing a traffic light or speeding. So what has really changed in the policy? Disappointingly little, say advocates. “The ICE announcement was a real disappointment,” said Fred Tsao, policy director with the Illinois Coalition for Immigration and Refugee Rights (ICIRR). “This is a program is in dire need of being fixed and what we ended up getting was a very, very minor change that may affect some cases but falls far short of the real reforms that the program needs.”
Cientos de personas marcharon este jueves por las calles de la ciudad de Phoenix para protestar contra la ley de inmigración de Arizona SB1070 y denunciar que ha generado discriminación y racismo en este estado sureño. La manifestación, ed denominada “Marcha por la justicia y en contra de la SB1070 y la separación de las familias”, se produjo desp