The good news: a group of pro-sovereignty GOPers signed a letter to the President condemning immigration policies that would admit millions more foreign workers when unacceptable levels of American unemployment persist.
The bad news: only 16 members signed the letter: Mo Brooks (R-AL), Lou Barletta (R-PA), Kerry Bentivolio (R-MO), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Walter Jones (R-NC), Phil Gingrey (R-GA), Michele Bachmann (R-MN), John Fleming (R-LA), Steve King (R-IA), Ted Yoho (R-FL), Joe Wilson (R-SC), Steve Stockman (R-TX), Lamar Smith (R-TX), Steven Palazzo (R-MS), Mike Rogers (R-AL), and Jeff Duncan (R-SC). These individuals are excellent representatives of voter concerns, but one might wish there were more signers.
The January 8 letter was sent before the terrible job numbers for December came out: only 74,000 jobs were added to the economy, the lowest number since January 2011. The total for the year was just 2.2 million, similar to 2012.
Below, jobs added to the economy by month in 2013.
The dismal report is a strong indication that a jobless recovery is indeed the new normal, and structural changes caused by industry outsourcing and increasing automation/robotics show that the bleats of billionaires that they need more foreign workers are based on simple greed.
Rep. Mo Brooks appeared on the Cavuto business show on Friday and made a clear case for protecting the American worker from open-borders globalists. Brooks quoted Sen. Harry Reid who mentioned that there are three competitors for every available job (arguing emergency unemployment insurance should be extended) — yes, Brooks agreed, jobs are scarce, so why import more foreigners to compete against citizens? He estimated that the Senate bill would create 40 million additional workers over a decade, an unsustainable increase given the level of anemic job creation.
Brooks also voiced his fear that Speaker Boehner would “cave” to the amnesty side.
We write to you today on behalf of the 21 million Americans who can’t find a full-time job. We write to you on behalf of the 6 million young Americans who are neither working nor in school. We write on behalf of the countless American workers whose wages today are lower than they were more than a decade ago. We write on behalf of the 90 million Americans over 16 – including early retirees, college grads living at home, and those living on welfare – who are not part of our nation’s workforce.
That is why we reject your call for the House to get an immigration bill to your desk that would permanently displace American workers. The Senate immigration bill, which the White House helped craft and which you personally endorse, would double the number of guest workers brought into this country at a time of crippling joblessness and falling incomes. On top of that, the Senate immigration bill would also add millions more permanent immigrant workers through green cards – handing out permanent residency to more than 30 million immigrants over the next decade. This represents a tripling of the normal green card rate. Continue reading this article
Politico reports that the powerful Chair of the House Judiciary Committee Bob Goodlatte believes he has the “solution” for the problem of 11 million illegal aliens living openly in the shadows.
Note to clueless Republicans: illegal aliens don’t cross the burning Arizona desert so they can become citizens to vote in US elections. They come for American jobs that normally pay substantially more than employment in Mexico and points south.
But back to the millions of illegals who cause so much head-scratching in Washington, what should be done with them is the big question vexing the big important brains.
How about. . . nothing. Leave them exactly as they are because they are getting along fine as is. (Of course, if they are caught drunk driving or shoplifting or engaging in document fraud, they should be deported after serving appropriate sentences.)
Life “in the shadows” must be quite agreeable since many illegals manage for years, as illustrated by Pew research from the paper Unauthorized Immigrants: Length of Residency, Patterns of Parenthood, December 2011. It found that “nearly two-thirds of the 10.2 million unauthorized adult immigrants in the United States have lived in this country for at least 10 years.”
The illegals would prefer to have the threat of deportation removed so they can continue to work at their stolen jobs, and legalization with its associated work permit would do that immediately, or as soon as the rubber stamps can be produced. Then they would have been rewarded for lawbreaking by getting everything they came unlawfully to get. For that reason:
Legalization IS Amnesty.
Congressman Goodlatte has been dreaming up enforcement strategies that can be made into legislation, but he may have forgotten that actually carrying out laws is the job of the executive branch. And the current President is arguably the biggest friend open borders ever had and will not enforce sovereignty after an amnesty any more than he has thus far. A Rasmussen poll from last October found only 5 percent of voters believed that an amnesty would include genuine border enforcement.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) says he sees “no reason” why current undocumented immigrants shouldn’t gain legal status as long as Congress enacts tougher border-security and enforcement measures.
In a Telemundo interview set to air Sunday, Goodlatte addressed the set of immigration principles that Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said earlier Thursday is expected to be released in the “coming weeks.”
While not delving into specifics of the document, Goodlatte said the principles are meant to show the broader House Republican Conference how all the pieces of immigration reform would fit together and ultimately “galvanize” support among lawmakers.
Though reform has essentially been written off for dead this Congress, Republican leaders in the House have said they want to get an overhaul done and many lawmakers in the chamber are eager to pass a rewrite of current immigration laws.
Goodlatte outlined three pillars of an overhaul – ensuring border enforcement, fixing the legal immigration system and determining a legal status for immigrants already in the country illegally. He stressed that interior enforcement was a major point of focus for Republicans, noting that as much of 40 percent of undocumented immigrants did not cross a border illegally, but overstayed a visa.
“If we can have a way to get [enforcement] up and operating, I see no reason why we can’t also have an agreement that shows how people who are not lawfully here can be able to be lawfully here – able to live here, work here, travel to and from their home country, be able to own a business, pay their taxes,” Goodlatte, a veteran lawmaker who was an immigration lawyer before coming to Congress, said on the Telemundo show “Enfoque,” according to a transcript of the interview. Continue reading this article
Across the Islamic world, not every single Muslim believes that women should be entirely shrouded in identity-erasing tents — who knew? However the usual knuckle-dragging suspects have the opinions one might expect.
Pew Research has repackaged some polling results from the University of Michigan which surveyed seven majority Muslim countries about the attitudes of how women should appear in public. The fine points of difference between the various styles of headgear are curious, where there is varying opinion about very similar items. In particular, the chador, al-amira and hijab seem nearly identical to infidel eyes, but have divergent levels of approval among the persnickety expert misogynists.
The chart at right shows the percentage of respondents who think women themselves should decide what they should wear, and it is indicative of women’s lower value throughout the Ummah. Only two countries have a majority who think women should pick their own clothing.
Curiously, Saudi Arabia is one of the most repressive countries in a tough field, yet 47 percent there believe women should be allowed to self-dress. Perhaps they imagine the choice ranges between a black niqab (essentially a tent with eye slits) and a grey one.
It’s crazy to allow masked people to wander the streets of western societies. Even if they aren’t up to no good, the presence of such an alien tribe is an affront to the openness we value. Burqas are an emphatic expression of Islamic supremacism, a statement that they came to conquer, not assimilate.
Why do we admit such a hostile group as immigrants?
An important issue in the Muslim world is how women should dress in public. A recent survey from the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research conducted in seven Muslim-majority countries (Tunisia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey), finds that most people prefer that a woman completely cover her hair, but not necessarily her face. Only in Turkey and Lebanon do more than one-in-four think it is appropriate for a woman to not cover her head at all in public.
The survey treated the question of women’s dress as a visual preference. Each respondent was given a card depicting six styles of women’s headdress and asked to choose the woman most appropriately outfitted for a public place. Although no labels were included on the card, the styles ranged from a fully-hooded burqa (woman #1) and niqab (#2) to the less conservative hijab (women #4 and #5). There was also the option of a woman wearing no head covering of any type.
Overall, most respondents say woman #4, whose hair and ears are completely covered by a white hijab, is the most appropriately dressed for public. This includes 57% in Tunisia, 52% in Egypt, 46% in Turkey and 44% in Iraq. In Iraq and Egypt, woman #3, whose hair and ears are covered by a more conservative black hijab, is the second most popular choice. Continue reading this article
Nigel Farage is the head of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), a group disdained by liberal media as extreme for supporting the nation state against distant trans-national bureaucrats. However, the anger of the little citizens about the opening of their country to potentially millions of welfare-abusing Romagarians has been evident, and therefore the opinions of a pro-national-sovereignty party and its leader have become more appropriate.
Below, diverse foreign gypsies congregate on a bench in London.
More recently, he has called for a five-year moratorium on new immigration, a fine thing to hear from any politician anywhere.
Incidentally, the following article is also noteworthy for a leading member of the Labour Party responsible for the politically motivated immigration surge, Jack Straw, to express regret for the treasonous population-altering project. We Americans never heard an apology from the late Ted Kennedy, but then he was not sorry for injecting millions of big-government foreigners into this country.
NIGEL Farage has called for a five-year halt to immigration by people who want to settle permanently in the UK.
The Ukip leader said that he wanted to see immigration levels fall and an end to the “open door” policy for Bulgarians and Romanians, even if it had an impact on the British economy.
His comments came as a survey revealed that more than three quarters of people want to see a cut in immigration.
Mr Farage told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: “If you said to me ‘Would you want to see over the next 10 years a further five million people come into Britain and if that happened we would all be slightly richer?’, I would say ‘Actually, do you know what? I would rather we weren’t slightly richer and I would rather we had communities that felt more united and I would rather have a situation where young unemployed British people had a realistic chance of getting a job.’
“So, yes, I do think the social side of this matters more than pure market economics.”
He continued: “Let’s be flexible on work permits, let’s recognise that we do have some skills shortages in the British economy – which is very much a failure of our education system.
“But in terms of immigration, in terms of people coming to settle, I would suggest that for up to a five-year period we don’t have people coming to settle until we sort out the mess.” Continue reading this article
Democrats are currently crying big crocodile tears about jobless Americans running out of emergency unemployment checks, and they’re accusing Republicans of being cruel monsters for not voting to extend the benefits. Curiously, these same Democrats vote consistently for illegal-alien amnesty, which would immediately loose millions of workers into the legal job market￼, thereby increasing competition for employment. In fact, all Senate Democrats voted for the deeply flawed immigration-amnesty bill last year.
Notably, the Congressional Budget Office reported that the Senate bill would reduce average wages in America for 12 years, increase unemployment for seven years and reduce per-capita gross national product growth for more than 25 years. The Senate bill also doubles legal immigration at a time when the accumulation of immigration, outsourcing and smart machines have created a jobless economic￼ recovery for Americans. The automated future will require far fewer humans for manufacturing and services.
The pose of Democrats that they are the friends of the American worker is simply not credible, given their open-borders strategy aimed at creating a permanent Democrat majority of big-government voters.
America doesn’t need more imported labor now or anytime soon, owing to the effects of globalization and automation. Washington must get real about the economic realities workers face now and going forward.
The public can’t be happy about the current demanding pests.
Below, uninvited Africans camping out in an Israeli park.
Israel is a tiny country, of around 8,000 square miles area, a little larger than New Jersey. It’s wealthy, but is hardly in a position to be babysitting thousands of freeloader foreigners looking for an easy entrance to the first world. Israel is too busy with its concerns of self-defense from neighbors like nearly nuclear Iran to waste its energy on a welfare sideshow for scroungers. It is surprising the normally orderly Israelis have allowed the situation to get so out of control.
But the Africans know to play the victim card when they arrive, claiming genocide back home when most are economic migrants. There are plenty of places in Africa where they could be safe, but they want to mooch a modern lifestyle.
Thousands of African migrants cram into Rabin Square in Tel Aviv, Israel, calling for a labor strike.
Their chants fill the air, summing up their message: “We need asylum.”
Activists estimate more than 50,000 migrants work illegally in low-paying jobs in Israel.
Many are fleeing persecution from war-torn areas like Sudan and Eritrea. The threat to their lives pushes them to undertake the dangerous journey via smugglers’ routes to Israel. A vast majority cross the Sinai Peninsula, known for being a hotbed of kidnapping and organ harvesting.
Once across the border in Israel, they try to claim asylum.
“All of us are fleeing genocide, fleeing dictatorship regimes. Looking for protection,” says the African Refugee Development Center’s Mutasim Ali, who came to Israel from Darfur. “(A migrant) doesn’t care where he gets it. We know it’s too difficult to cross the border making our way to Israel, but that’s the only option at the time.”
The asylum seekers complain that the Israeli government isn’t viewing their goal as legitimate, but rather sees them as migrant workers.
“The Israeli government leaves them in limbo from one side. The Israeli government calls them infiltrators, that they came here for work and that they are all criminals,” says Orit Marom of ASSAF, Aid Organization for Refugees and Asylum Seekers. “On the other side, they never check their asylum requests.”
The Israeli government refers to the asylum seekers as illegal migrants who are in the country to work.
They blame them for an increase in crime and say they threaten Israel’s internal security. The government says it is increasing the number of security personnel to combat the crime. Continue reading this article
Wait, you mean unlawful foreigners actually had to DO something to get their freebie? They don’t just get a driving permit merely by arriving at the door of the DMV? They are expected to LEARN the traffic laws of Nevada in order to pass a written test?
Doubtless la Raza will now lobby to lower the standards of the test, which is clearly racist as shown by the results.
See my earlier report: Crowds of Illegal Aliens Jam Nevada DMVs to Procure Driver Cards. At that time, excuses were made that illegal aliens were nervous about being in a government office and that was the reason for some not passing the quiz. Now we know the statistics of the failure, and it shows the typical attitude of entitlement that illegal aliens have in this country: they believe they should get everything just by being here.
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles officials have advice for immigrants seeking a driver authorization card: study.
They estimate 75 percent of applicants have failed the written test needed for the card under a new law that made the state the 11th nationally to offer driving privileges to people in the country illegally. The cards became available Thursday.
Applicants must correctly answer 80 percent of 50 questions to pass the test. They also are required to pass a driving exam to receive cards. The failure rate on the driving test was not immediately available. Continue reading this article
Why can’t anyone wearing a suit not understand the connection between permissive immigration (legal and illegal) and American unemployment? Do universities no longer teach supply and demand in Econ 101?
To liberals and their media poodles, there is no contradiction between a segment on a suffering long-unemployed American worker followed by an item about mass legalization with immediate work permits for millions of illegal aliens. (To elite Washington, the jobless American needs more unemployment benefits, and the illegal alien, who does just fine without “papers” as shown by length of residence, needs legalization for jobs.)
Which is exactly what happened on ABC’s “This Week” on January 5:
ZELENY: We met Kathy Biscotti of Baltimore, one of the 1.3 million Americans whose benefits expired late last year. She’s looking for a new job and asking congress for help.
KATHY BISCOITT, UNEMPLOYED: I’m not saying that it should last forever, but we need more time. What are we supposed to do in the meantime?
A few minutes later, Senator Rand Paul was chatting up his economic freedom zones to increase employment.
PAUL: Well, I think what’s really cruel is to have an economy that doesn’t have jobs in it. So we have to talk about what policy creates jobs. With regard to unemployment insurance, I’ve always said that I’m not opposed to unemployment insurance, I am opposed to having it without paying for it.
I think it’s wrong to borrow money from China or simply to print up money for it. But I’m not against having unemployment insurance.
I do think, though, that the longer you have it, that it provides some disincentive to work, and that there are many studies that indicate this. So, what I’ve been saying all along, we have to figure out how to create jobs and keep people from becoming long-term unemployed. That’s why I promoted the economic freedom zones which would dramatically lower taxes in areas where there’s long-term unemployment.
STEPHANOPOULOS: A final question. I want to get you on the record on immigration.
Our next guest, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, is confident that it’s going to get done, a comprehensive bill will eventually get done this year.
Is he right?
I know you were opposed to the comprehensive bill earlier in the year.
But can you support Speaker Boehner’s call for a series of measures on immigration?
PAUL: Yes. The reason — and I’ve had this conversation with Senator Schumer before — is that the reason it has failed is that the Senate bill that he proposed actually limited work visas and, I think, creates an incentive for more illegal immigration.
I’m for very expansive work visas. If you want to come to our country or if you’re one of the 11 million who are here, I’m for giving you a work visa. Continue reading this article
When the brilliant futurist, biochemistry professor and science fiction writer Isaac Asimov visited the 1964 World’s Fair in New York City, he was inspired by the array of new technology to prognosticate about how American society would look five decades hence.
He was concerned about automation’s effect on society, with one problem being that of widespread boredom: “The world of A.D. 2014 will have few routine jobs that cannot be done better by some machine than by any human being. Mankind will therefore have become largely a race of machine tenders. Schools will have to be oriented in this direction.”
In 2014, we are beginning to see the effects of automation and robots on jobs of all sorts. Schools don’t train many machine tenders per se; instead numerous human jobs are quietly disappearing due to smart machines.
Asimov saw explosive population growth as dangerous to social order, as shown by his observation (not from the NYTimes article): “Democracy cannot survive overpopulation. Human dignity cannot survive [overpopulation]. Convenience and decency cannot survive [overpopulation]. As you put more and more people onto the world, the value of life not only declines, it disappears.”
[. . .] As I stood in line waiting to get into the General Electric exhibit at the 1964 fair, I found myself staring at Equitable Life’s grim sign blinking out the population of the United States, with the number (over 191,000,000) increasing by 1 every 11 seconds. During the interval which I spent inside the G.E. pavilion, the American population had increased by nearly 300 and the world’s population by 6,000.
In 2014, there is every likelihood that the world population will be 6,500,000,000 and the population of the United States will be 350,000,000. Boston-to-Washington, the most crowded area of its size on the earth, will have become a single city with a population of over 40,000,000. Continue reading this article
The joint has been jumping at the Nevada DMV, as thousands of unlawful foreigners have sought possession of driving authorization cards. The new year allows illegal aliens to register to receive a document that permits legal driving within the state.
As usual, greasy politicians in support claimed that the policy would increase highway safety and lead to more insured drivers. However, illegals often purchase insurance in order to register their car or get a driving permit, then cancel it a month later. Sometimes they manage to buy insurance after an accident and get away with it.
The federal Real ID Act prevents the authorization to be used for identification, but that sounds like a squishy proposition. Any business or agency that would accept a worthless Mexican matricula card would likely find the Nevada card legal enough.
A Las Vegas television piece reported that some of the illegals were not prepared to take a written test and flunked it. The excuse was made that they were just nervous because they had never been in a DMV before — poor sensitive Mexicans! The segment also called the foreigners “undocumented citizens” more than once:
His three daughters are U.S. citizens, his wife’s a U.S citizen, but he’s not. He’s still waiting on the federal government to give him that shot under comprehensive immigration reform proposals being considered in Washington, D.C.
As a result, the 44-year-old North Las Vegas resident from Mexico has been working construction jobs without a Social Security number and has been driving illegally in Las Vegas for well over a decade.
But at least part of that immigrant narrative is about to change.
On Thursday, Soto was among thousands who showed up at DMV offices across the Silver State to apply for the new driver authorization card, which allows those who are in the country illegally to drive legally.
Nevada is just the latest in a group of 11 states that are allowing these immigrants to drive. As many as 60,000 immigrants are expected to apply for the cards in the state. The process began Thursday, when Nevada’s new law took effect.
Despite widespread criticism of the driving card law, there were no protests across the state on Thursday, although some of the offices in Las Vegas became so crowded that DMV halted written tests, said DMV spokesman Kevin Malone.
REASONS BEHIND THE BILL
The intention of Senate Bill 303, which passed the state Legislature in the spring, is not only to raise millions of dollars in revenue for Nevada but also to make the state’s roads safer.
Officials say nearly all the holders of the card will have to purchase insurance for any car they operate. They must renew their driving card every year for it to remain valid. They will also have to pass DMV driving tests, which will make roads safer.
If you thought Black Friday after Thanksgiving drew crowds, you should have seen the DMV offices across the Las Vegas Valley on Thursday. Lines formed before dawn; the DMV offices didn’t open until 8 a.m. Later in the day, the wait time was an estimated hour, due primarily to people applying for the new card, DMV officials said.
So coveted is the card that Soto got up at 4:30 a.m. to get the first spot at the DMV office in North Las Vegas on Decatur Boulevard just north of the Las Vegas Beltway.
“This is going to be great, not having to worry about driving anymore, not having to look in the rearview mirror every time you start the engine,” said Soto, who has paid nearly $1,000 in fines after he was stopped by North Las Vegas police on two occasions in the past two years and could not produce a valid driver’s license. Continue reading this article
With the New Year, a pile of new law comes into effect, and the Golden State has almost exactly its share. Nationally, the states passed 40,000 bills into law and California’s new batch of 805 is pretty close to 1/50 of that number.
Nobody would accuse California of having a do-nothing legislature: the state’s Democratic lawmakers were busy bees last year, cranking out an assortment of items from the uber-liberal playbook. Governor Jerry Brown approved most, by signing 805 bills into law, while vetoing 96 in 2013.
This being Mexifornia, illegal aliens made out like bandits. An AP story dedicated a whole section of a recent article to the new laws benefiting them.
[. . .] Immigrants in the country illegally receive several new rights and protections.
It is a crime for employers to report workers to immigration authorities in retaliation for work-related complaints and for anyone to extort money from those in the country illegally by threatening to report their legal status.
Local law enforcement agencies can no longer detain immigrants for deportation if they are arrested for a minor crime and otherwise are eligible to be released from custody. Law enforcement agencies also are prohibited from requiring immigration or citizenship papers before releasing crime reports and other public records.
Immigrants who are not U.S. citizens can assist voters casting a ballot, and lawyers who are in the country illegally can be licensed to practice law.
A law granting immigrants who are in the country illegally the right to a driver’s license will take effect in 2015. [. . .]
The San Francisco Chronicle provided a fascinating sampler of 20 new California laws, illustrating the audacity of busybody liberalism unleashed:
Sacramento — California will begin 2014 with more than 800 new laws, many of which take effect New Year’s Day. The added laws run the gamut, from the controversial – such as gun-control measures and protections for transgender and undocumented people – to the lesser known about teen texting and home improvement requirements.
Some of the most talked about laws have delayed implementations, such as the $1-per-hour increase to the minimum wage that begins July 1, or new regulations allowing undocumented immigrants to apply for driver’s licenses by Jan. 1, 2015.
Here’s a look at 20 new laws.
Gun control: Eleven new gun-control laws were signed into law in 2013, including a ban on the manufacturing or sale of large-capacity magazine conversion kits. Possession of large-capacity magazines will be banned under that law beginning July 1.
Lead bullets: A controversial law banning lead hunting ammunition will be phased in statewide by 2019 in an effort to protect wildlife from ingesting the toxic metal.
Trust Act: State and local law enforcement agencies will no longer be allowed to detain undocumented residents solely based on their immigration status, unless they have been convicted or charged with serious or violent crimes. Continue reading this article
Fewer than 0.2 percent of the 11.7 million illegal aliens in the United States were deported in 2012 for violating immigration laws, according to data released by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.
“It is a drop in the bucket,” Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, told The Daily Caller. “Relative to the [agency] resources and tools they have been given to do this job, it is a record low,” said Vaughan.
Government officials say they deported a total of 368,644 people. But almost two-thirds of those people, or 235,093, were caught at the border and promptly returned to their home countries.
Only 133,551 resident illegals were picked up in the interior of the country and deported, the ICE report admitted.
But 82 percent of those residents were deported for other offenses, ICE acknowledged. Those offenses include drunk driving, assault, robbery and drug possession.
The remaining 18 percent adds up to only 20,000 illegals of the 11.7 million illegals believed to be living in the United States.
That’s only one immigration-law deportation for every 585 illegals. [. . .]
Meanwhile, liberal propaganda organs continue to pump out emotional tripe based upon the self-created problems of lawbreaking foreigners.
The opening act was a nine-year-old boy who complained of living in fear because his father might someday be caught and deported. The office janitor dad wasn’t in jail or especially in danger because of American immigration laws, but just the slight possibility of deportation was considered a cruelty worthy of sympathy by the largely hispanic audience.
The Washington Post found a similar worried little boy in order to purvey its sob story:
Below, illegal alien Jorge Penate resides in Virginia with his wife Diane and son Jason.
It’s too bad for the kid. It’s tough being 12 and knowing your father might be sent back to Guatemala — although a deportation is unlikely after all this sympathetic publicity.
Twelve-year-old Jason Penate spent the holidays hanging close by his father. They picked out a Christmas tree and decorated the front window of their Gainesville, Va., home with candy canes, and Jason tried very hard not to think about whether his father would still be here in the new year.
Jorge Penate, a Guatemalan national who came to the United States illegally in 1997, has a hearing scheduled Monday that will determine whether he can stay in the country. A drunken driving arrest two years ago launched deportation proceedings and cast his family’s future into uncertainty.
Jason wrote a letter to the immigration judge, explaining that the three days his father was detained in 2011 “were the worst days of my life” and asking not to be separated from him again. “If he does have to leave I think every day of my life is going to be the worst,” Jason wrote.
More than 1 million illegal immigrants were deported in the past three years, a record number reflecting increased enforcement efforts under the Obama administration. The crackdown has spun the lives of hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens — including children like Jason — into upheaval. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.