Face-Off Over Immigration

Posted November 7, 2014

Highly recommended read.  For a powerful description of the intense political battle being waged in Washington, DC over immigration reform, see the Nov. 7 front-page Wall Street Journal article by Carol E. Lee and Peter Nicholas, Face-Off Over Immigration.  (Copyright 2014, WSJ – Nov. 7, 2014)

With this week’s significant Republican gains in Congress, which include shifts in chairmanships and rule-making power, the 2015 Congress may finally produce reform legislation that President Obama would not veto – likely piecemeal legislation, but nonetheless, progress might be made on updating wide provisions of an outdated U.S. immigration system that address lawful immigration.

Yet based on the tone and scope of disagreement by the principles related to illegal immigration (dramatically depicted in this article), concerning the need for legislation that looks back to address the millions already here, as well as forward, it becomes difficult to see how the legislative effort would succeed if, within the remaining lame duck Congress, President Obama acts unilaterally using so called executive action to grant provisional protected status to a wide pool of presently illegal immigrants, as he has promised to do.  (See Wikipedia explanation of Executive Orders here, including how past American presidents have wielded this unilateral authority without congressional backlash.)

Continue reading »

Tagged with: • • •
 

An Open Letter to the California Legislature Regarding AB 1159

Posted August 13, 2013

Note: The below is re-printed from a letter authored by yours truly and addressed to California State Senator Kevin de Leon (D-Sacramento) and Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego), co-authors of proposed Assembly Bill (AB) 1159.  AB 1159 purports to ‘protect California consumers’ by requiring immigration attorneys in the State of California to meet special licensure requirements, including a new requirement to be bonded or adequately insured in order to practice ‘immigration reform services,’ and to be subject to special oversight by the State Bar of California.  The measure is proposed in anticipation of Congress passing Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation.  It is motivated by a flawed understanding of our profession and by blatant advocacy of special interests in California that will, in effect, backfire if passed.  ~ FRW  

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Dear Senator de Leon and Assemblywoman Gonzalez:

I practiced immigration law for seven years in downtown San Diego before relocating to San Rafael in the Bay Area.  I have over 15 years experience in this field.  It is a more difficult and complex field than most non-immigration practitioners realize, often thankless and far from lucrative.  But I love it anyway and intend to stick with it.

I essentially began my career by studying international relations at UC Davis, and my parents live in Sacramento.  I know this state, its international flavor and its immigrant community well.

Please realize, the far majority of immigration lawyers in California are ethical and honest, and routinely achieve for our clients exactly what they came to us for.  We take pride in our work because we see the results first-hand.  We attend heart-warming naturalization ceremonies.  We’ve all seen clients cry with joy at an approval notice.  We are witnessing first-hand how Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals is changing lives for the better.  We anguish with our clients when we run out of options.

In this regard, AB 1159 is misguided policy and an overreach, not to mention insulting to a large class of California professionals.  It is not enough to assume a level of fraud in the immigration bar that would justify these measures.  You need to demonstrate a proliferation of past fraud through evidence.  Among California’s immigration attorneys, the evidence is just not there.

Continue reading »

Tagged with: • • • • •