Legal Momentum Briefing Room

Four-year-old U.S. Citizen Deported, Separated from Parents

Four-year-old Emily Ruiz was on her way home to New York from a trip to Guatemala with her grandfather when the pair was detained by immigration authorities during a stopover at Dulles International Airport. Emily, a United States citizen, and her grandfather, a Guatemalan traveling with a valid work visa, were detained because of an immigration infraction that supposedly occurred two decades before. Ruiz and his granddaughter were told they would not be allowed to stay in the country and were deported to Guatemala.

Meanwhile, Emily’s father, Leonel Ruiz, was waiting for his daughter’s plane at Kennedy Airport, which arrived without her on it. He soon learned that, despite Emily’s U.S. citizenship, his daughter was deported because of her grandfather’s immigration infraction.
 
Emily’s deportation launched a legal battle for her return and a national debate over the separation of children from their immigrant parents. Officials at Customs and Border Protection say they offered Mr. Ruiz the opportunity to pick up his daughter at the airport (which he denies), and that he “elected to have her return to Guatemala with her grandfather.” Yet an encounter with immigration officials would have posed a serious risk to Mr. Ruiz, who could have been detained or deported. Mr. Ruiz, who speaks little English, said that he spoke with an agent over the phone in English and was presented with two choices: Emily could enter the custody of the State of Virginia or she and her grandfather could return to Guatemala.

While Emily was eventually returned to her parents in the United States, her case highlights a critical component of the immigration reform debate. Laws that threaten deportation and the separation of parents from their children make it difficult for undocumented immigrants to report crimes, participate in prosecution, or seek life-saving support services. Legal Momentum's Immigrant Women Program advocates for immigration policies that acknowledge the constitutional right of immigrant parents to care for, have custody of, and control over their children. The separation of U.S. citizen children and immigrant parents can have a devastating impact on families.

There are 5.5 million children who have at least one undocumented parent in the United States. Legal Momentum believes that reforms in immigration laws and policies will be most effective in improving conditions of immigrant women and their families when they are grounded in an understanding of the challenges and circumstances confronted by many immigrant women in America.

• Learn more about Legal Momentum's work on gender bias and immigration reform.
• Learn more about Legal Momentum's Immigrant Women Program.
• Learn more about Legal Momentum.

 

SB 1070 Copycat Bills Threaten Health and Safety of Immigrant Women and Children

Sixteen states have introduced legislation similar to Arizona's SB 1070, the controversial immigration law blocked by a federal judge last July. Legal Momentum submitted an amicus curiae brief in that case, which detailed the severe harm SB 1070 would have caused immigrant women and their children.

SB 1070 makes it a misdemeanor for non-citizens to be in Arizona without documentation. The law also makes it a crime to shelter, hire or transport undocumented immigrants and forces police to check the immigration status of anyone suspected of being undocumented. Legal Momentum successfully argued that, if implemented, these provisions would threaten immigrant women’s health and safety, increase the risk that immigrant women would be separated from their children and punish immigrant women victims of violence.

Over the past two decades, Congress and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have made major strides in addressing the barriers to safety immigrant women face, particularly immigrant victims of domestic violence, trafficking, and sexual assault. Thanks to Legal Momentum, the 2000 and 2005 reauthorizations of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) included specific provisions to help immigrant women victims of violence, including the U visa and the T visa. Legal Momentum, in partnership with the Vera Institute for Justice, also trains local law enforcement agencies on using these visas.

SB 1070 copycat bills threaten this work. Immigrant women will be reluctant to seek help or report crimes for fear of being detained or deported. Currently, fewer than 20% of immigrant women victims of violence who are undocumented or who have temporary legal status seek help from law enforcement, compared to more than half of women victims of violence in the general population. Fewer undocumented women are likely to report crimes or seek aid if states enact SB 1070 copycat laws.

Legal Momentum believes that reforms in immigration laws and policies will be most effective in improving conditions of immigrant women and their families when they are grounded in an understanding of the challenges and circumstances confronted by many immigrant women in America.

• Learn more about Legal Momentum's work on gender bias and immigration reform.
• Learn more about Legal Momentum's Immigrant Women Program.
• Learn more about Legal Momentum.

Senate Fails Immigrant Women on DREAM

Over the weekend, the Senate blocked the DREAM Act (the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act), legislation that would have significantly improved the lives of immigrant women and girls in the United States. By providing access to higher education, DREAM would have fostered the economic potential of a generation of young people and enhanced the ablity of the United States to compete internationally for generations. By blocking debate, a minority of Senators stopped this DREAM in its tracks.

The DREAM Act would have offered a path to legal immigration status for undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as young children, who graduate from U.S. high schools and then go on to pursue higher education at our nation’s colleges and universities or join the U.S. armed forces. Though the DREAM Act would have undoubtedly had an impact on all immigrant children, the prospects for immigrant women and families were particularly substantial. An estimated 436,000 girls currently under the age of 18 would have been eligible to benefit from the DREAM Act. Approximately 57,000 young women would have been eligible for lawful permanent resident status as high school graduates with higher education. The Senate’s NO vote on DREAM condemns immigrant girls and young women who have graduated from high school to a life of work in the informal sector of the U.S. ecomony, a shadow economy with low wages and high rates of exploitation, sexual violence and abuse.

Without access to legal immigration status and its educational opportunities, undocumented immigrant women are destined to a life of economic insecurity that precludes their ability to contribute fully to our communities.  They cannot pursue higher education and cannot serve in the U.S. armed forces.  Perhaps no group will feel the harsh impact of the Senate’s NO vote more than young immigrant women and girls and ultimately their children who whose mothers’ opportunity to pursue their American DREAM was denied.

As a women’s organization dedicated to ending violence against women and enhancing economic opportunity for all women Legal Momentum and like minded women’s organizations will remember this day and this vote. 

Legal Momentum thanks President Obama, House Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid, Senator Durbin, Representative Berman, The Congressional Hispanic Caucus and all members of Congress who have worked hard to secure passage of DREAM and we look forward to continuing this struggle in 2011.

Learn more about the importance of the DREAM Act for immigrant women and girls.
Learn more about Legal Momentum’s Immigrant Women Program.
Learn more about Legal Momentum.

Working in the Shadows: Immigrant Women Sexually Victimized on the Job

Over four million undocumented immigrant women currently live in the United States. Many of these women are employed in the U.S. food service industry, and, according to a new report from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), many of these women suffer sexual harassment and sexual violence on the job.

Injustice on Our Plates demonstrates what Legal Momentum’s Immigrant Women Program has often found in its efforts across the country: that undocumented immigrant women are forced to work for little pay in a shadow economy, exploited by their employers while remaining invisible to most Americans.

In June, Legal Momentum released Reforming America’s Immigration Laws: A Woman’s Struggle. We noted that undocumented women migrants are "vulnerable to sexual violence, sexual assault, sexual harassment, and other gender-motivated exploitation in the workplace. Absent any fear that employees will report these actions and crimes, employers continue to take advantage of immigrant women."

Injustice on Our Plates echoes Legal Momentum’s findings in the U.S. food service industry. The SPLC interviewed 150 immigrant women working throughout the United States. The vast majority of the women the SPLC interviewed said that they suffered sexual harassment and/or sexual violence on the job. At the Agriprocessers Inc. meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa – the site of one of the largest federal immigration raids in history in May 2008 – the women workers described sexual harassment by their male supervisors as “widespread and constant.” According to the SPLC, this type of exploitation is common across the country:

In Salinas, Calif., a worker told the EEOC that farmworkers there referred to one company’s field as the field de calzon, or “field of panties,” because so many women had been raped by supervisors there. In Florida, women farmworkers dubbed fields “the green motel” for the same reason. In Iowa, women said they had encountered the problem so often that they believed it was a common practice in the United States to exchange sex for job security.

Immigrant women are the silent victims of the broken immigration system. Legal Momentum’s Immigrant Women Program advocates for comprehensive immigration reform that considers how even facially gender-neutral laws create more hardship for immigrant women. Congress must create paths to legalization that equitably value women’s work, eliminate 287(g) and/or Safe Communities Programs that often harm immigrant women crime victims, and eradicate backlogs in the family immigration system.

The women profiled in Injustice on Our Plates are the backbone of the U.S. economy, yet they live in the shadows. Comprehensive immigration reform must include provisions to ensure that these women are able to live and work free of sexual harassment, sexual violence, and fear.

New Law in New York Offers Long-Overdue Protections to Domestic Workers, Many of Whom Are Women

Just before Labor Day, Governor David Paterson signed the historic Domestic Workers Bill of Rights into law. The law is the first of its kind to be passed in the United States, and will make major strides towards protection within the workplace. In certain circumstances, the law will provide paid sick and vacation days, overtime pay, and one day of rest per week, affecting New York’s 200,000 domestic workers.

Ninety-three percent of domestic workers are women and 95% are women of color, especially immigrants from the Caribbean, Asia, Africa and Latin America. A study by Domestic Workers United found that 26% of domestic workers make less than minimum wage and live below the poverty line. Thirty-three percent say they have been abused verbally or physically. Sixty-seven percent reported receiving overtime pay sporadically, if at all, and only 10% receive health insurance coverage from their employer. Thus, it is the already marginalized communities who are the ones most affected by workplace conditions.

After the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights was passed by the Senate in June, Legal Momentum wrote:

“This bill is a major victory and critical step towards the protection of domestic workers within the workplace. Domestic workers make up one of the most essential, but hidden and unprotected, workforces in the United States. Without workplace protections, domestic workers are often left powerless to their boss’ demands, which many say can vary drastically. Ai-jen Poo, director of the National Domestic Workers Alliance, described this workforce as a ‘wild west,’ in which, ‘You have some employers that are very good and some that are not, and there is nothing mediating that relationship,” she said. “So early on, workers said, ‘We need basic protections and guidelines so that we won’t be at the whim and mercy of our employers.’ ”

In a recent article by ColorLines, Rinku Sen notes that the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights should serve as a model for the way in which lawmakers and organizers think about labor rights in our current time. Sen traces the history of workers’ exclusion from labor legislation, from domestic labor to agricultural workers – all professions largely made up of people of color and/or women. The struggles of these workers have generally been sidelined by major unions. Indeed, the victory of the law came from the long-term organizing of Domestic Worker United (DWU) and the New York Domestic Workers Justice Coalition, two workers collectives that are not unions.

Sen also argues that labor rights and the role of unprotected workers are becoming an increasingly relevant issue – “As our economy continues shifting toward service and information industries, more and more formerly middle-class and white workers have seen their jobs similarly “contingentized” as domestic workers and day laborers. As employers load up on temporary, subcontracted and part-time workers rather than full-time employees, they avoid paying into Social Security and providing unemployment insurance, health coverage, and workers’ compensation. The can even avoid providing vacation or sick days.”

Domestic workers are an invisible and exploited workforce that make our communities and families run. The passage of the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights is a major step towards ensuring the protection of these workers, who are largely made up of women and people of color. As we move forward, labor rights must incorporate all workforces, not only the most traditional. When domestic workers are overlooked, it is overwhelmingly women of color who suffer. The law paves the way for future efforts to protect all workers from exploitation and abuse.

• To read ColorLines' “Domestic Workers Lead the Way to 21st Century Labor Rights,” click here.

• For more information on the bill, read The New York Times, “For Nannies, Hope for Workplace Protection” here.

Sexual Abuse Within Immigration Detention Must Be Addressed Immediately

The Human Rights Watch's new report, "Detained and at Risk: Sexual Abuse and Harassment in United States Immigration Detention," demonstrates the critical need for protection from sexual abuse within immigration detention. The report details various incidents and allegations of abuse, the frequency of which is largely unknown. One of these incidents occurred in 2007, when a trafficking victim was sexually assaulted in a Florida jail with which Immigration and Customs Enforcement had a contract to rent bed space for immigration detainees.  Women detained on criminal charges who were housed in the same dormitory assaulted the victim while she was partially incapacitated by prescribed sedatives. Later, in 2008, five women detained at the Port Isabel Service Processing Center in Texas were assaulted when a guard entered their rooms in the detention center infirmary. Assuring them that he was acting under the orders of a physician, the guard told the women to undress and then proceeded to touch intimate parts of their bodies.

Data collected on these type of incidents is highly erroneous, because it typically excludes detention facilities not run exclusively by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Additionally, victims face fear of reporting abuse from the very people in charge of their deportation.

In recent proposals by ICE, the agency has stated their intention to address this issue. Yet, in their report, Human Rights Watch emphasize that action must not be limited to ICE’s recommendations, but must be taken swiftly to enforce legally binding detention standards in all immigration detention facilities.

Key recommendations of the report include:

 

To the Department of Homeland Security -

• Institute legally binding detention standards applicable across all types of immigration detention facilities.
• Appoint a Prison Rape Elimination Act coordinator.
• Publish information on reported incidents of sexual assault.

To Immigration and Customs Enforcement -

• Ensure that reports of sexual abuse are thoroughly investigated.
• Improve the monitoring of compliance with detention standards by detention facilities.
• Expedite implementation of the detention standard on preventing and responding to sexual assault and abuse across all facilities holding ICE detainees.
• Require detention centers to facilitate on-site access for local community providers of support services for sexual assault survivors.
• Standardize procedures for ensuring access to appropriate relief measures for victims, including release from detention and visas to remain in the United States and assist law enforcement.
• Require detention facilities to have reasonable suspicion of infractions before conducting pat-down searches of detainees.
• Ensure that detainees are fully informed about their rights with respect to sexual assault, abuse, and harassment.

To the Department of Justice:

• Issue regulations based on the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission's recommendations without delay.
• Review the department's experience in prosecuting sexual assault and abuse in immigration detention with a view to improving procedures and prosecution rates.

To the U.S. Congress -

• Demand disclosure of ICE records related to sexual assault, abuse, and harassment in  detention.
• Pass legislation setting standards for detention conditions.

The prevalence of sexual assault crimes within the criminal justice system stands in sharp contrast to the intentions of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which was designed specifically to educate law enforcement as well as other professionals about sexual assault. The VAWA, which Legal Momentum helped to draft and pass, provides funds to educate medical professionals, victim advocates, law enforcement, prosecutors and judges. Our National Judicial Education Program (NJEP) is targeted at educating judges about sexual assault and we have produced an abundance of materials on understanding and addressing sexual violence. Additionally, the Immigrant Women Program specifically addresses issues facing immigrant women and their families, including wrongful detention and separation of families. The perpetration of sexual assault by officials themselves is a fundamental human rights abuse that must not be tolerated. Human Rights Watch’s recommendations are a critical step towards ensuring the safety of all individuals, regardless of their citizenship, within the detention system.

Learn more about Legal Momentum's National Judicial Education Program.

 

Learn more about Legal Momentum's Immigrant Women Program.

Read Human Rights Watch’s new report "Detained and at Risk: Sexual Abuse and Harassment in United States Immigration Detention."

In Arizona, a Vital Ruling for Immigrant Women

On July 28, 2010, Judge Susan R. Bolton of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona issued an order that blocks the most controversial parts of Arizona's immigration enforcement law (SB 1070) from going into effect.

Seven lawsuits had been filed against the law, challenging its constitutionality and alleging that it would have led to racial profiling. Judge Bolton conducted hearings on three of those suits – including the Friendly House challenge (which Legal Momentum's amicus brief supported) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) challenge, which was filed after the Friendly House case.

Judge Bolton's partial preliminary injunction order relates directly to the DOJ case and has been incorporated into the Friendly House case as well. Her order states that the DOJ would likely prevail on the merits in showing that certain Sections of SB 1070 are preempted by federal law.

Accordingly, the order blocks the sections that would require:

•  officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws;

•  immigrants to carry their "papers" at all times; and

•  immigrants to refrain from seeking work.

The order also enjoins officers from conducting warrantless arrests of individuals based on a belief that a person may have committed a public offense that would make her removable from the U.S.

Judge Bolton expressly stated that the "United States is likely to suffer irreparable harm" unless the sections described above are enjoined. While enjoining those provisions today, Judge Bolton also stated that: "There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens. ... By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a 'distinct, unusual and extraordinary' burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose." 

Judge Bolton also noted the particular harm SB 1070 would cause victims of violence (most often women), stating that U and T visa applicants and self-petitioners for relief under the Violence Against Women Act would not have the documents SB 1070 required immigrants to carry to prove their lawful status.

While the remainder of SB 1070 will take effect as scheduled tomorrow (including provisions that: require AZ state officials to work with federal officials on immigration matters; permit AZ residents to bring private lawsuits against AZ law enforcement officers who adopt policies that restrict enforcement of federal immigration laws, and amend the definitions of certain existing AZ state crimes), Governor Brewer may not enforce the "detain and verify," "identity document," "job seeker restriction," or "arrest for removability" provisions that were the primary subjects of the concerns expressed in Legal Momentum's amicus brief.

- Read the order by U.S. District Judge Susan Carbon striking down sections of the Arizona immigration law.

- Read the Amicus Brief that Legal Momentum submitted in Friendly House v. Whiting case.  View the list of organizations that signed on in support of Legal Momentum's brief.

- Read the Plaintiff's brief in Friendly House v. Whiting, arguing against SB 1070. 

- Learn more about Legal Momentum's Immigrant Women Program.

Legal Momentum Files Amicus Curiae Brief in Effort to Block Arizona’s SB 1070

Legal Momentum’s Immigrant Women Program has filed an amicus curiae brief in support of a lawsuit filed in Arizona federal court to block implementation of the state’s notorious immigration law, S.B. 1070. The brief, filed in conjunction with Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, pertains to the lawsuit, Friendly House v. Whiting, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), the National Immigration Law Center and the Asian Pacific American Legal Resource Center.

The brief outlines key areas where Arizona’s new law undermines federal civil rights protections for immigrant women and their families, including those who are victims of violent crime. The law is an evisceration of decades of humanitarian incentives by Congress to protect the health and safety of all people living in the United States, regardless of legal status.

The brief notes that over the past two decades, the United States Congress and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have made major strides towards addressing the vulnerabilities of immigrant women and the widespread barriers to help that are experienced by immigrant victims of domestic violence, trafficking, and sexual assault. Many laws have been enacted to protect these women and families, rights that Congress has called essential for the prevention of violence against women. Specific laws have been established to protect immigrants from arrest or deportation when they report crimes or participate in prosecution. In addition, federal law guarantees that all persons, without regard to immigration status, have access to programs and services necessary to protect life and safety, including shelter, emergency medical services, victim assistance, soup kitchens and disaster relief.

Yet Arizona S.B. 1070 is a direct assault on all of this. Of the countless devastating consequences of the law, it threatens the safe and health of immigrant women and children, it increases the risk that immigrant mothers will be separated from their children, and it punishes immigrant victims of violence.

S.B. 1070 puts immigrant women and their children at risk of being detained or arrested any time they leave their homes. Those in need of aid and federal services will no longer seek help because of fear. These critical services include, but are not limited to, Emergency Medicaid for immigrant women and children, shelters and transitional housing, and community-funded health clinics offering urgently needed health care, including child care.

Additionally, S.B. 1070 devastates the right of a mother to safely care for her children, regardless of legal status. Children will perpetually be at the risk of losing their mothers, who will face the constant threat of deportation in all locations, including the workplace, the home, and even places of worship. Children who are separated from their mothers will be placed in the overburdened foster care system because S.B. 1070 disregards federal “sole-caregiver” humanitarian release protections that offer primary caretaker parents alternatives to detention. In Arizona, 84 percent of children with at least one immigrant parent are U.S. citizens.

Because they are unable to participate in the family law cases that ensue after separation, immigrant mothers often face permanent termination of parental rights. Separation and the subsequent placement of the child in foster care is in nobody’s best interest, especially mothers and their children.

Finally, S.B. 1070 punishes immigrant victims of violence by hindering victims’ ability to report a crime without fear of persecution. In their pursuit of detaining undocumented immigrants, Arizona law enforcement is even allowed to stake out rape crisis centers and domestic violence shelters, locations even federal law enforcement are strongly cautioned against operating in. Currently, fewer than 20 percent of battered immigrant women who are undocumented or who have temporary legal status seek help from law enforcement, compared to more than half of battered women generally. These numbers will drastically fall with the implementation of S.B. 1070, as victims will rightly fear deportation and persecution by Arizona law enforcement.

Indeed, S.B. 1070 will cause irreparable harm to immigrant women and children and must be immediately stopped. Legal Momentum’s brief concludes, “SB 1070 deters immigrant women from so much as leaving their homes, let alone from affirmatively contacting law enforcement or going to schools, health care providers and social service agencies related to the care and nurturing of their children. The law chills the exercise of legal rights, stops pursuit of justice system remedies, and cuts off immigrant women and their children from federally funded services that protect life and safety and prevent significant morbidity and mortality among immigrant women.”

 

Bill Passed To Give Workplace Protection for Domestic Workers

On Tuesday, New York took a major step towards ensuring workplace protection for domestic workers, who number around 200,000 in the metropolitan area alone. The bill passed by the senate will grant workers basic rights which are often ignored by their employers.  Domestic workers would receive paid holidays, sick days, vacation days, and overtime wages. Employers would also be required to give them 14 days’ notice, or or termination pay, before firing a domestic worker. The bill would be the first of its kind in the nation. The Assembly passed a similar bill last year which must be reconciled with the Senate’s bill before it is to be passed by Gov. Patterson. It is expected that he will sign a new combined version of the bills.

This bill is a major victory and critical step towards the protection of domestic workers within the workplace. Domestic workers make up one of the most essential, but hidden and unprotected, workforces in the United States. Without workplace protections, domestic workers are often left powerless to their boss’ demands, which many say can vary drastically. Ai-jen Poo, director of the National Domestic Workers Alliance, described this workforce as a “wild west,” in which, “You have some employers that are very good and some that are not, and there is nothing mediating that relationship,” she said. “So early on, workers said, ‘We need basic protections and guidelines so that we won’t be at the whim and mercy of our employers.’ ”

For more information on the bill, read The New York Times, “For Nannies, Hope for Workplace Protection” here.

The Impact of Immigration Enforcement on Child Welfare

First Focus has recently produced a policy brief examining the impact of immigration enforcement on children of undocumented immigrants.

“While children of immigrants have a lot at stake in the discussions surrounding U.S. immigration policy, their interests remain largely ignored in the debate. For instance, little consideration is given to the impact of immigration enforcement on the 5.5 million children, the vast majority of whom are native-born U.S. citizens, living with at least one undocumented parent.1 Similarly overlooked are the significant challenges experienced by public child welfare agencies that encounter children separated from their parents due to immigration enforcement measures.

“The U.S. child welfare system is based on the notion of ensuring the safety and best interest of the child; however, this principle is often compromised in the face of conflicting federal immigration policies and practices. This policy brief examines the intersection of immigration enforcement and child welfare and the difficulties facing immigrant families caught between the two systems. Recommendations are provided to prioritize keeping children with their families and out of the public child welfare system whenever possible and to ensure that separated families who do encounter the child welfare system receive appropriate care and due process.”

Click here to read the rest of “The Impact of Immigration Enforcement on Child Welfare.”