More Than Just News, A Public Service in Print

February 1, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

As one of the top news markets in the nation, Los Angeles has no shortage of quality journalism, provided in many platforms and in many languages. For decades, Eastern Group Publications, publishing original bylines in both English and Spanish, has been among the newspaper groups that has made its own immeasurable contribution to journalism and to the communities it has covered.

Unincorporated East Los Angeles, Boyle Heights, Bell Gardens, and smaller neighborhoods in Northeast Los Angeles are some of the communities I covered during my time at EGP. Elizabeth Chou, who currently works at LA Daily News, was my co-worker at EGP back then. She covered Monterey Park, Montebello, Commerce and Vernon. We reported on a gamut of news worthy events, from local to national public policies affecting our specific communities, individual city councils, neighborhood councils, contentious elections, activism, crimes and centenarian birthday parties. We spent hundreds of hours interviewing, researching, fact checking, writing and copyediting. Chou additionally prepared the newspaper layout.

Gloria Angelina Castillo is a former journalism professional. She has a Master’s Degree from USC’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, and a Bachelor’s Degree from the University of California, San Diego, where she majored in Ethnic Studies.

Mia Valerie Juarez was just in high school when she began interning at EGP. The East LA native started off by helping to find local events to include in EGP’s Community Calendar but soon enough she was conducting interviews and writing news articles. The 20-something-year-old is now a television news reporter and producer for a national news affiliate in Nebraska.

Several EGP journalists have continued their careers in the news industry. Some have gone on to work for major Spanish language publications, like La Opinion, and you can find the bylines of others, including past interns, in English language newspapers across the country, or on internet blogs and news sites.

Though EGP has been a good launching pad for aspiring journalists, its most important impact has been to simply give a voice to several historically lower-income, under-served communities.

Besides covering harder news, simply by being in the community, EGP often found positive stories and examples of kindness that showed the dignity in written-off communities. (Example:  the efforts to revive the historic Maravilla Handball Courts).

EGP has documented historically significant events from the Chicano Movement to where we are today with younger generations moving forward empowering concepts and fiercely dispelling stereotypes.

In recent years, news organizations have begun making their original reporting available translated into the other language. The Boyle Heights Beat, a literary program founded by USC Annenberg School of Journalism, is now providing similar hyperlocal bilingual coverage in Boyle Heights.

Nonetheless, for decades, it’s been EGP’s hyperlocal coverage that has filled the news void left by larger news organizations. EGP’s newspapers were distributed free and to people’s doorsteps for years.

During my time there, we provided detailed coverage of Los Angeles Unified School Districts’ Public School Choice reform, the East Los Angeles Cityhood movement, the Exide lead contamination, “Dreamers” bravely participating in non-violent protests before President Obama signed Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and the list goes on.

What other newspaper would so painstakingly take on the task of outlining and summarizing all the applications to take over operations at some of the region’s most underperforming schools?

EGP was a perfect fit for me. I wanted to report in both English and Spanish. I wanted readers to access the same information and “be on the same page” so to speak. Because I grew up in a Spanish-speaking home watching Spanish-language news broadcasts, as I got older I began to notice that sometimes there was a significant disparity in English versus Spanish-language news. For example, if there was a recently published study on the economy and immigrants, the Spanish-language news might highlight the beneficial contribution of immigrants while the English-language news might focus on the negative. The result, I suppose, was immigrants feeling empowered while anti-immigrant sentiment was spurred in different homes.

We worked with other ethnic media organizations as well. I wrote an article on Adult Day Health Centers closing due to state budget cuts. In 2013, I earned an award for a three-part bilingual series on Autism in the Latino and monolingual community in our coverage area.

I felt strongly that my work at EGP was a public service. Unfortunately, working as a journalist in underserved communities does not qualify under the category of “public service” for student loan forgiveness programs, otherwise, things may have worked out differently for me.

I was often overwhelmed at EGP, I felt a tremendous responsibility to cover everything because there was so much going on and if I didn’t cover it, maybe no one would.

I’m truly grateful to the Sanchez family for their support all those years, and for their sacrifices to keep the newspaper afloat while others buckled with the economy. I hope that if new owner/leadership is found for EGP, they will be as passionate about reporting on the always evolving complexity of immigrants and Americans in these communities.

Gloria Angelina Castillo is a former journalism professional. She has a Master’s Degree from USC’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, and a Bachelor’s Degree from the University of California, San Diego, where she majored in Ethnic Studies.

Casa Blanca Presentará el Lunes Su Plan Para la Reforma Migratoria

January 25, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

La Casa Blanca presentará el lunes “un marco de trabajo” para reformar la legislación migratoria, incluida una salida para los “soñadores”, y pidió a los miembros de los partidos Republicano y Demócrata que trabajen juntos para encontrar una “solución definitiva”.

“Este marco de trabajo contemplará los cuatro pilares ya acordados: asegurar las fronteras y acabar con vacíos legales, acabar con la migración familiar en cadena, cancelar la lotería de los visados y encontrar una solución definitiva al DACA”, dijo la portavoz de la Casa Blanca, Sarah Sanders, durante una rueda de prensa.

Este anunció llega después de que los demócratas forzaran un cierre de la Administración el pasado viernes al no apoyar la propuesta de ley presupuestaria del Gobierno tras comprometerse a rechazar cualquier propuesta si antes no se garantizaba la protección de los jóvenes inmigrantes indocumentados, conocidos como “soñadores”.

Tras casi tres días de cierre, este lunes ambas formaciones alcanzaron un acuerdo para buscar una solución al problema de la inmigración una vez se aprobará, cuanto menos, una medida de gasto temporal que permitiera la reapertura de la Administración, tal y como sucedió.

De acuerdo con Sanders, Trump ha mantenido “docenas de reuniones” con miembros de los Servicios de Seguridad y funcionarios “que saben qué hacer para proteger a Estados Unidos”, antes de darle forma a esta propuesta que será presentada el lunes, por lo que animó al senado “a presentarla a votación”.

Fue el propio Trump quien puso la situación de los “soñadores” en el foco de las negociaciones cuando el pasado 5 de septiembre anunció el fin del Programa de Acción Diferida (DACA) e invitó al Congreso a encontrar una solución permanente antes de que el programa sea suspendido el 5 de marzo

“Tras décadas de inacción por parte del Congreso, es hora de que trabajemos juntos para solucionar este asunto de una vez por todas. Los estadounidenses no se merecen menos”, dijo Sanders.

With Sights on 2018 Elections, Women Refocus Message

January 24, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets of downtown Los Angeles and across the nation this past Saturday, as the second annual Women’s March looked to convert anger at President Donald Trump’s policies into victories in this year’s elections.

The coordinated rallies in L.A., Washington, D.C., Chicago, New York, Santa Ana, Palm Springs and other cities also aimed to repeat the success of last year’s demonstrations, where an estimated 3 to 4 million took to the streets to protest Trump’s inauguration.

As was the case last year, the march saw a wide variety of priorities being advocated, including women’s rights, environmental protection, access to health care, criminal justice reform, voting rights, immigrant and LGBTQ rights.

Saturday’s march took place just hours after the Congress, unable to reach a compromise on the federal budget, plunged the country into a three-day government shutdown, causing uncertainty among federal workers and services dependent of federal revenue.

Democrats had vowed to block approval of a continuing resolution to temporarily fund the government unless it contained a fix for DACA, something members of both parties and the president had professed to want.

Members on both sides of the aisle had been working to negotiate a new DACA deal to protect from deportation undocumented immigrants who were brought to America as children, but the talks stalled and a three-day federal government shut down ensued.

For many at Saturday’s Women’s March, the plight of Dreamers, as the young DACA recipients are often called, was of equal importance to other issues highlighted at the event.

From #MeToo to DACA, Women’s March in Los Angeles Saturday turned attention to having power at the polls in 2018. (Photo by Alejandro JSM Chavez)

“Being born and raised in California, the immigration issue is at the top of my list. I love that California is a sanctuary state. And I look forward to keep advocating for those people.” Melanie Hunter, an African-American woman from Koreatown, told City News Service while wearing a shirt that read, “Why be racist, sexist, homophobic or transphobic when you can just be quiet?”

Linda Castaneda Serra of Los Angeles said she is the daughter of immigrants from El Salvador who are now facing deportation following the president’s revoking of TPS for “refugees like her parents.

“I was born here and will turn 18 in May, and you can believe I will vote, and I will get everyone I know to vote,” she said, sharing her views on Facebook and Twitter.

Meanwhile, negotiations continued in Washington D.C. throughout the weekend and a deal, without a fix for DACA, was reached Monday to restart the government and keep it going for three more weeks.

GOP leaders promised they would bring DACA up for a vote, a promise that now appears to be far from a done deal as the president continues to vacillate on what he wants, failing to give clear direction to his party on what a DACA policy should look like.

From the streets to the main stage in front of City Hall, marchers lamented actions coming out of the Trump Administration and society in general.

“What brought me out here today is everything that has been happening in the last year, specifically all of the injustices against people of color and women and especially the Donald Trump presidency, which I consider to be illegitimate,” said a woman named Shannon who lives in Anaheim but preferred not to give her last name. Shannon was holding a sign that read “GOP Greedy Old Perverts.”

Organizers of the WMLA on Facebook said last year’s event was focused on “hear our voice,” but this year is shifting to “hear our vote.” They also said the event is not a protest but a “pro-peace, pro-inclusivity event focused on marginalized voices and the power of voting. Part of our resistance is focusing on how we will use our vote to create the future we want. We respectfully ask that ‘anti’ sentiments are not the focus of this event.”

 

Organizers had predicted at least 200,000 this year, but Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti Tweeted after the event “600,000 strong,” while the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department put the crowd at 300,000. Garcetti told the crowd at City Hall the official estimate was 500,000 people, which he said would make it the largest march in the country. Last year’s L.A. march was also the largest (organizers said about 750,000 people attended in 2017, although fire officials estimated the crowd at about 350,000).

Many of the event’s early speakers did not directly address Trump’s policies but rather the  MeToo movement that has resulted in dozens of famous and powerful men accused of sexual assault or sexual harassmentFederal shutdown after The New York Times and The New Yorker in October published details of alleged assaults and harassment by Hollywood movie producer Harvey Weinstein. But due to Trump himself being accused of multiple sexual harassment incidents along with bragging on tape about sexually assaulting women — which helped inspire the first Women’s March —  the connection to Trump was apparent.

“Recently I’ve heard a lot of men say that our movement makes them feel uncomfortable and paranoid,” actress Constance Wu from the ABC show “Fresh Off the Boat” told the crowd. “And to that I say, this movement is not about catering our voices to accommodate your comfort. We are not here to suppress our perspectives for your relief. We are here because we deserve our voices and our perspectives too.”

Actresses Natalie Portman, Olivia Munn, and Viola Davis were among the early lineup of speakers who took the stage, with other politicians, activists and celebrities scheduled to speak until 4 p.m.

“Let’s declare loud and clear, this is what I want, this is what I need, this is what I desire …,” Portman said.

Police said there were no active threats against the march before it began, and Officer Rosario Herrera with the Los Angeles Police Department’s Media Relations Section reported no arrests or major incidents related to the march. Two reports were taken alleging battery, she said. No details were
available.

Police had advised attendees to leave backpacks and other bulky items at home and minimize the materials that they take with them. The march is the first large public event to be held since the City Council enacted a new set of rules last October on what is allowed at a public event where First Amendment rights are expressed.

Anyone in violation can first receive a warning from a police officer before being cited or arrested.

EGP Managing Editor Gloria Alvarez contributed to this story.

Chain Migration or Family Reunification?

January 19, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

It is historical fact that millions of people have come to the U.S. to create new lives in freedom. Immigration is the origin of our history as a country. Our federal government did not even keep immigration records until 1820.

The bedrock of U.S growth and prosperity is immigration and for nearly thirty years the priority has been family reunification. The Immigration Act of 1990, the most comprehensive overhaul of our immigration system since 1965, was passed with bipartisan support and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush. Under President Bush, over 475,000 refugees were welcomed and family reunification was prioritized by expanding the number of family-based visas allotted per year. Today, chain migration has replaced family reunification as a term describing the process of allowing legal immigrants to apply for relatives abroad to come to the United States.

Families of every type are the foundation of strong communities across the globe. As a rule, families provide mutual support to their members: share culture, customs, language and traditions; provide discipline and guidance to young members and support elders or ill members in need.

International migration is not new. The process can separate families as members seek adventure; economic possibility; safety or love. Sometimes entire families move together but often young men or women migrate seeking to secure a foothold of employment and stability before bringing along their sweethearts, wives, parents, siblings or children.

The current family-based immigration system was established by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (INA of 1965) as an end to the national origin quotas that dated back to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and heavily favored immigrants from Northern and Western Europe. Family reunification has a positive impact on individuals and the communities in which they live and is a cornerstone of our country, the country built by immigrants. According to media reports, President Trump benefits from family reunification as his in-laws followed to join his wife and surely support the culture, custom and traditions of the family by living in close proximity to their daughter and grandson.

Lately, family based immigration has been replaced by the language of “chain migration” as a deficit in our immigration system and a burden to our communities. House Judiciary Chairman Robert W. Goodlatte, R-Va., said “Chain migration takes away from the United States the ability to choose people to come to this country based on who are most needed here and to do a better vetting process than we do now.” I believe we are indeed choosing separated family members to be reunited because family is the foundation of a strong community and country. Family reunification policies reflect our country’s values and are the secret recipe to our success.

Immigration based on family reunification is a national asset, not a burden and changes to this focus of the Immigration Act of 1990 are not needed. Recognizing the humanity of immigrants includes having respect for their families.

 

Stacie Blake is Director of Government and Community Relations at the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants. This op-ed was previously published by Thomson Reuters.

 

 

It’s Time for a Permanent Solution to Protect Dreamers

January 19, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

Depression, anxiety, frustration: This was my reality as an undocumented young woman living in the United States. For many years the love and support of my family was the only thing that sustained me. In 2012 my life changed with the implementation of the DACA program (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). A weight was lifted off my shoulders when I learned I would be able to live a normal life. I immediately began to daydream as I had when I was a little girl, optimistic about my new life in the U.S. My new DACA status would allow me to finally be able to come out of the shadows — not only to survive, but to thrive.

My new found joy and excitement and that of many others like me sparked attacks from local politicians. In Arizona, the state in which I grew up and call home, a ban on licenses was enacted, and a lawsuit against education access for DACA program recipients immediately followed. These attacks compelled me to join a local organization and become a community organizer. As I integrated myself into the immigrant youth movement, I also continued to live my personal life. The fight for justice brought me many things — confidence, knowledge and a new perspective on life. But most importantly, it brought me love.

In July of 2015 my son was born, instantly bringing light into the world. I had carried him for nine months with mixed emotions of hope and fear. I shared in some of the same fears of most expectant mothers, but I also bore worries in my heart that not many did. I thought about how the world would welcome the child of a Dreamer. I cried when I played out all of the what if scenarios in my head. What if one day they ended DACA and tried to deport me? The stress was relentless, but I made it through and found ease at the first sight of my baby’s smile.

The last two years have been like nothing I’ve ever experienced. There have been many ups and downs on the rollercoaster of motherhood. I remember my heart filling with joy when Iker said “Mamma” for the first time, and I also remember the worry and frustration I felt as he started to fall behind and was diagnosed with a speech delay. But my son Iker and I have an indescribable bond. He refuses to fall asleep at night unless I am by his side and his little hands can touch my face. Our family is bound by unbreakable love. Still, In the back of my mind the uncertainty about what could happen to our small family has always remained. Recently my concerns have been resurrected. DACA recipients have once again become the subjects in a political game after President Trump ended the program in September. Our lives are now in the hands of a Congress whose extreme bipartisanship could threaten our livelihood if a permanent solution is not reached soon.

I find myself thinking about what my family and I will do. How will we financially maintain our new house and be able to able to put food on our table? What happens to our son if ICE comes to tear our family apart in the middle of the night? These are all painful questions I now have to answer and plan for. There are more than 800,000 DACA youth across the country who face the same complicated questions, many of them also parents. Ending the DACA program is more than just about contributed dollars lost to the economy. It is more than just companies losing employees, and it’s more than certain elected official getting their way to gain political points. Ending DACA means ending the livelihood of real people. It means homes lost, families living in fear and in hunger. It means children like Iker crying as they are torn from the arms of their mothers.

Congress has the opportunity to pass a permanent legislative solution to protect Dreamers by ensuring a DREAM provision is added on to the must pass spending in the upcoming weeks. The deadline to pass this new spending bill is Jan. 19. Negotiations have been held and shared with the public. I strongly believe we cannot justify protection of one group of marginalized people while simultaneously creating policy that will further criminalize and separate families. Ending chain migration, the lottery system, TPS, and further militarizing the border will create a multitude of problems for the country and our immigrant communities.

 

Korina Iribe Romo is an Arizona State University graduate student, DACA recipient and community organizer. She is advocacy director at the student organization, Undocumented Students for Education Equity.

 

 

L.A. Council Votes to Join Legal Fight to Block Trump on Immigration

January 18, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

The Los Angeles City Council took several actions Wednesday in opposition to the Trump administration’s immigration policies, including directing the city attorney to take legal action to try to stop the cancellation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

The council voted 12-0 to authorize City Attorney Mike Feuer to file an amicus brief in support of the California Attorney General’s lawsuit against the termination of the DACA program. The motion was altered in an amendment from its original language that called on the city to file its own lawsuit or join the California lawsuit.

“It’s shameful and immoral that our federal government is debating this,” Councilman Joe Buscaino said before the vote. “Let’s send a message to the federal government and reiterate the importance that immigrants make this community and this country an amazing place to live and work.”

Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have been working to negotiate a new DACA deal to protect from deportation undocumented immigrants who were brought to America as children, but the talks have stalled and a federal government shutdown is possible if an agreement cannot be reached.

DACA was rescinded by President Donald Trump in September, but he gave lawmakers six months to come up with a new deal. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra joined a lawsuit by the attorneys general of the states of Maine, Maryland and Minnesota, as well as the University of California and other plaintiffs, and obtained a preliminary injunction last week against the Trump administration over the move to end DACA, which was created by then-President Barack Obama by executive order.

“As I’ve said before, we will resolve the DACA issue with heart and compassion — but through the lawful Democratic process — while at the same time ensuring that any immigration reform we adopt provides enduring benefits for the American citizens we were elected to serve,” Trump said in a statement in September.

Councilman Gil Cedillo, who chairs the council’s Immigrant Affairs, Civil Rights and Equity Committee, seconded the resolution introduced by Councilman Jose Huizar.

Cedillo took the opportunity to publicly criticize Trump, who during a recent meeting with congressional leaders about immigration issues, reportedly asked why the United States should accept immigrants from “shithole” countries like Haiti and in Africa rather than places like Norwa

“It’s embarrassing. The `s-hole countries’ and all the comments related to that indicate that the attacks on DACA and the immigrant community that were first expressed as he began his campaign still remain the underlying basis for the policy from the administration,” Cedillo said. “That is not a way to run a nation. That is not what we are about.”

The council also approved — on a 12-0 vote — a resolution asking the city attorney to report on litigation options against the termination of the Temporary Protected Status Program, which offers a provisional reprieve from deportation to citizens of some countries. The resolution, which was altered in an amendment, had originally sought to support legislative or administrative action that would extend the TPS Program.

The Trump administration announced earlier this month that it was canceling the TPS status for immigrants from El Salvador in 2019, and the council voted 13-0 in approval of a second resolution officially opposing the move.

On a 13-0 vote,  the council approved a new immigration program that will facilitate a connection between lawyers and individuals interested in obtaining letters of representation to aid them when they are being questioned by immigration officials.

Gobierno Reitera Que la Deportación de “Soñadores” No Es Su Prioridad

January 18, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

La secretaria de Seguridad Nacional, Kirstjen Nielsen, aseguró el martes que su Gobierno no priorizará la deportación de jóvenes indocumentados que llegaron a Estados Unidos de niños, conocidos como “soñadores”, si fracasan las actuales negociaciones sobre inmigración.

Nielsen hizo estas declaraciones en una entrevista en la cadena CBS, mientras republicanos y demócratas tratan de sacar adelante una ley que permita residir legalmente en el país a los “soñadores”, beneficiarios del plan de Acción Diferida para los Llegados en la Infancia (DACA), cuya vigencia concluye en marzo por orden de Trump.

“No va a ser una prioridad para el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE) su deportación. Ya lo he dicho antes, no es la política del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional”, explicó.

“Si eres un receptor de DACA que está inscrito en el programa, lo que significa que no has cometido ningún delito, entonces, usted, de hecho, no es una prioridad de deportación para ICE si el programa finaliza”, añadió Nielsen, que insistió en que cualquier inmigrante que comete un crimen debe ser expulsado de acuerdo con la ley.

Un grupo de republicanos y demócratas lleva meses tratando de encontrar una solución para los más 800,000 jóvenes indocumentados que pudieron obtener un permiso de trabajo temporal y frenar su deportación gracias a DACA, proclamado en septiembre por el expresidente Barack Obama.

En septiembre pasado, Trump anunció el fin de DACA, pero pidió al Congreso que buscara una solución legislativa antes del 5 de marzo de 2018 de este año.

Una vez que venza esa fecha, los “soñadores” podrían ser deportados, aunque según reiteró el martes Nielsen no serán una prioridad.

Recientemente, el Gobierno de Trump se ha visto obligado a reanudar la renovación de las solicitudes de DACA por orden judicial, y precisamente este fin de semana, los Servicios de Ciudadanía e Inmigración de Estados Unidos (USCIS, en inglés), anunciaron la aceptación de solicitudes para aquellos que hubieran gozado ya de sus beneficios con anterioridad.

Concejales Reafirman Apoyo a Indocumentados con Nuevas Medidas

January 17, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

Concejales de Los Ángeles aprobaron el miércoles cuatro medidas de apoyo a beneficiarios de los programas DACA y TPS, mediante cartas de representación para residentes indocumentados y una prohibición de negocios con empresas que construyan el muro fronterizo propuesto por el presidente, Donald Trump.

El objetivo de las medidas, aprobadas por unanimidad, es proteger a los angelinos en situación “irregular”, porque “sus vidas afectan a la ciudad y a todo California”, declaró a EFE Gil Cedillo, concejal del Distrito 1 de Los Ángeles.

“Estamos enviando un mensaje a Trump (expresando) que continuaremos en resistencia a sus medidas draconianas de inmigración”, manifestó Cedillo.

“Como ciudad, respaldamos a todos nuestros residentes, independientemente de su estatus migratorio”, aseveró el concejal de la llamada “Pequeña Centroamérica”.

Las cuatro nuevas normas fueron presentadas por él junto a José Huizar, concejal del Distrito 14, del este de Los Ángeles, través del Committee on Immigrant Affairs, Civil Rights and Equity (Comité de Asuntos de Inmigrantes, Derechos Civiles y Equidad).

La primera medida busca unirse a la demanda contra el Gobierno federal, interpuesta por el Procurador General de California, Xavier Becerra, en oposición al cierre del Programa de Acción Diferida para los Llegados en la Infancia (DACA).

Además, supone una segunda querella a favor de los “soñadores” por parte de la ciudad.

Otra medida viene a apoyar “cualquier acción legislativa o administrativa” que extienda el programa Estatus de Protección Temporal (TPS), que afecta a salvadoreños, nicaragüenses y haitianos residentes de Los Ángeles, a quienes la administración Trump canceló la protección legal.

También, el acuerdo abriga a los hondureños, que viven con la incertidumbre de qué pasará cuando termine la extensión de su amparo migratorio, válido hasta el 5 de julio.

“Sobre los asuntos de DACA y TPS tenemos el derecho de rechazar las (medidas) del Gobierno federal, debido a los efectos económicos negativos que la eliminación de esos programas tendrá en nuestra economía local”, aclaró Cedillo.

El concejal de Los Ángeles Gil Cedillo se unió a CARECEN y otras organizaciones de derechos de los inmigrantes para denunciar la decisión del presidente Trump de poner fin al Estatus de Protección Temporal (TPS) de 200,000 salvadoreños, siguiendo el mismo destino para Honduras y los Haitianos que viven en los Estados Unidos con TPS. / Foto por José Rodríguez

“Aunque el Gobierno federal supera la ley local y estatal, tenemos autoridad para ejecutar nuestras propias leyes”, indicó.

Otra medida aprobada el miércoles es un “programa” de redacción de misivas de representación legal “a personas en riesgo de deportación”.

“Las cartas de representación son una capa adicional de protección para aquellos (indocumentados) que entran en contacto con agentes del Servicio de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE)”, detalló el concejal del Distrito 1.

“No es una garantía de que ICE los deje en paz, pero (la carta) les dará representación legal asignada, que ICE necesitará consultar para cualquier interrogatorio”, adelantó.

La cuarta medida apoya la propuesta de ley SB30 del senado californiano, introducida por el senador Ricardo Lara, que prohibiría a California hacer negocios con empresas o individuos que participen en la construcción del muro en la frontera de California con México.

Huizar comentó a EFE que “en una nación fundada por inmigrantes debemos defender a nuestros angelinos de un presidente que basa su política de inmigración en la raza y los estereotipos”.

“La ciudad de Los Ángeles no se quedará de brazos cruzados mientras (Trump) hace el peor tipo de política con ‘soñadores’, beneficiarios de TPS e inmigrantes de todo el mundo que vienen a nuestras costas en busca del sueño americano”, apostilló.

En Los Ángeles, según estimaciones del censo nacional, residen más de 4 millones de personas, de las cuales el 49 por ciento es de origen latino.

Juez de EEUU Ordena a Trump Que Reactive Parcialmente el Plan Migratorio DACA

January 11, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

Un juez ordenó el martes al presidente, Donald Trump, que reactive parcialmente el plan DACA para jóvenes indocumentados y siga recibiendo solicitudes hasta que se resuelvan todos los desafíos legales pendientes en diferentes tribunales del país.

El juez William Alsup, de la corte del distrito norte de California, emitió este martes su decisión, en la que califica de “arbitraria y caprichosa” la determinación que Trump tomó el pasado septiembre para acabar con el DACA y dar al Congreso hasta el 5 de marzo para solucionar la situación de sus beneficiarios.

El plan DACA (Acción Diferida para los Llegados en la Infancia) fue promulgado en 2012 por el entonces presidente del país, Barack Obama, para proteger de la deportación y otorgar un permiso de trabajo temporal a unos 690.000 jóvenes que llegaron a Estados Unidos cuando eran niños, conocidos como “soñadores”.

En el fallo emitido el martes, el juez Alsup considera que el Gobierno de Trump tiene la obligación de volver a aceptar las solicitudes de renovación del DACA por parte de aquellos individuos que ya habían recibido previamente los beneficios de este programa y que ahora se están quedando sin protección.

Sin embargo, no pide al Gobierno de Trump que acepte nuevas solicitudes por parte de jóvenes que nunca antes se habían inscrito en el programa DACA.

El magistrado hace esta distinción porque considera que los demandantes, entre los que se encuentra la Universidad de California, han conseguido demostrar que los beneficiarios del DACA, sus familias, escuelas y comunidades sufrirían un “daño irreparable” si la extinción del programa sigue adelante.

El presidente de EE.UU., Donald Trump (centro), participa en una reunión con unos 25 congresistas y senadores de ambos partidos en la Casa Blanca de Washington. EFE/Archivo

Con el fin de evitar ese daño, el juez ordenó a Trump mantener parcialmente vivo el programa hasta que haya una solución definitiva en todos los litigios pendientes sobre el DACA.

Entre esos casos se encuentra, por ejemplo, la demanda que interpusieron el 11 de septiembre pasado de manera conjunta los estados de California, Maryland, Maine y Minnesota, donde viven 238.000 “soñadores”.

Esos estados alegan que el fin del DACA perturbará la vida de sus habitantes, provocará grandes daños a sus economías y ocasionará pérdidas a sus compañías, universidades y centros de investigación que dan empleo a los jóvenes indocumentados, pues con el fin del programa ya no podrían trabajar legalmente.

El fiscal general de California, Xavier Becerra, dijo el miércoles que el tribunal “determinó que los méritos del caso de California son fuertes, que habría un daño inmediato si el plan de la Administración para terminar DACA procediera y que el interés público se cumple prohibiendo a la Administración de finalizar DACA antes de que se resuelvan los problemas legales.

“Las vidas de los Dreamers cayeron en el caos cuando la Administración de Trump intentó terminar el programa de DACA sin obedecer la ley”, dijo Becerra.

La Universidad de California (UC), parte de la demanda que desafía la acción del presidente en DACA, emitió un comunicado el martes diciendo que el sistema universitario “esta complacido y alentado que el tribunal haya otorgado una orden judicial para detener temporalmente la recisión del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional del programa de Acción Diferida para los Llegados en la Infancia (DACA).

“Esta decisión crucial permite que casi 800,000 beneficiarios de DACA permanezcan en los Estados Unidos mientras las demandas sobre la legalidad de la recisión de DACA llegan a los tribunales”, dijo la declaración del UC, que también señalo que el mandato temporal no acaba con “el miedo y la incertidumbre” entre los destinatarios de DACA en todo California…que desean continuar viviendo, trabajando, aprendiendo y contribuyendo al país que reconocen como su hogar.

“No niega, ni disminuye la necesidad urgente de protección permanente a través de una solución legislativa”, dice el comunicado.

La decisión adoptada el martes por el juez Alsup, que fue nombrado para su puesto en 1999 por el presidente Bill Clinton, tiene carácter temporal y es probable que el Ejecutivo interponga un recurso.

Al respecto, en un comunicado, uno de los portavoces del Departamento de Justicia, Devin O’Malley, aseguró que su Gobierno “continuará defendiendo enérgicamente” en las cortes que el DACA fue promulgado por Obama de forma “ilegal” y, ante ello, “espera hacer valor su posición en futuros litigios”.

El miércoles por la mañana el presidente Trump arremetió contra el “injusto” sistema judicial.

“Demuestra a todo el mundo lo roto e injusto que es nuestro Sistema Judicial cuando el lado opositor en un caso (como el de DACA) siempre corre al Noveno Circuito y casi siempre gana antes de que lo reviertan tribunales superiores”, escribió Trump en su cuenta oficial de Twitter.

Gloria Alvarez, Gerente Editorial de EGP, contribuyo a esta historia.

U.S. Judge Orders Trump to Revive DACA

January 10, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

A federal judge on Tuesday ordered President Donald Trump to partially revive the DACA program for undocumented youth and to continue accepting applications until all pending legal challenges are resolved in the different courts across the country.

Issuing a temporary injunction, U.S. District Judge William Alsup, of the Northern District Court of California, called Trump’s decision last September to end the program, and to give Congress until March 5 to find a solution to resolve the legal status of DACA recipients both  “arbitrary” and “capricious.”

The DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program, created in 2012 by then President Barack Obama, protects undocumented youth — often referred to as “Dreamers”  — from deportation and has granted temporary work permits to some 690,000 young people who arrived to the U.S. when they were children.

In his ruling issued Tuesday, Alsup declared that the Trump administration is obligated to accept requests for DACA renewals by individuals who previously benefited from the program and are now without protection.

U.S. President, Donald Trump, participates in a meeting with 25 congressmen and senators from both parties in the White House in Washington. (EFE/Shawn Thew)

However, the government is not required to accept new applications from young people who had not previously submitted an application, according to the ruling.

Alsup said the plaintiffs, including the University of California, had demonstrated that DACA beneficiaries, their families, schools and communities would suffer “irreparable harm” if the program is eliminated.

In order to avoid that damage, Alsup ordered Trump to keep the program partially alive until there is a definite resolution to all pending litigation over the DACA program.

Among those cases is, for example, the lawsuit filed last Sept. 11 by the states of California, Maryland, Maine and Minnesota, home to more than 238,000 “Dreamers.”

These states allege that the end of DACA will disrupt the lives of its residents, cause great damage to their economies, businesses, and universities and research centers that employ undocumented youth as a result of DACA, who will no longer being able to work in the country legally.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said Wednesday that the Court had “determined that the merits of California’s case are strong, that there would be immediate harm if the Administration’s plan to terminate DACA were to proceed, and that the public interest is served by prohibiting the Administration from ending DACA before the legal issues are ruled on.

“Dreamers’ lives were thrown into chaos when the Trump Administration tried to terminate the DACA program without obeying the law,” Becerra said.

The University of California, which filed a lawsuit challenging the president’s action on DACA, issued a statement Tuesday saying the university system “is pleased and encouraged that the court has granted an injunction to temporarily stop the Department of Homeland Security’s rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

“This crucial decision allows nearly 800,000 DACA recipients to stay in the United States as lawsuits over the legality of the DACA rescission make their way through the courts,” said the UC’s statement, which also noted, however, that the temporary injunction does not end the “fear and uncertainty” among DACA recipients across California … who want to continue to live, work, learn and contribute to the country they know as home.

“It does not negate, nor lessen, the urgent need for permanent protection through a legislative solution,” the statement reads.

The ruling by Judge Alsup, who was appointed to his post in 1999 by President Bill Clinton, is temporary, and it is likely that the executive branch will lodge an appeal.

In a statement, a spokesperson for the Department of Justice, Devin O’Malley, said the federal government “will continue to strongly defend” the president’s action in the courts, saying that the Obama-era program was created in an “illegal” manner, a point they will prove in “future litigation.”

On Wednesday, President Trump attacked what he called an “unjust” judicial system.

“It shows everyone how broken and unfair our Court System is when the opposing side in case (such as DACA) always runs to the 9th Circuit and almost always wins before being reversed by the higher courts,” wrote Trump on his official Twitter account.

EGP Managing Editor Gloria Alvarez contributed to this story,

Next Page »

Copyright © 2018 Eastern Group Publications/EGPNews, Inc. ·