The national policy announced by Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security officials this week comes after a yearslong legal fight led by the American Civil Liberties Union through a lawsuit filed in Los Angeles.

“Providing legal representation to people with significant mental disabilities is not only legally sound, but also the only humane way to run our immigration system,” said Ahilan Arulanantham, an attorney with the ACLU of Southern California and the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project.

About 34,000 immigrants are detained daily and more than 1,000 of them have mental disabilities of some kind, according to the ACLU.

In 2010, the ACLU won a right to representation for two mentally disabled men who spent years in custody. Both were legal residents facing deportation after criminal convictions.

The lawsuit was filed by José Antonio Franco-Gonzalez, a Mexican immigrant with a cognitive disability who was detained in federal immigration facilities for nearly five years without a hearing or a lawyer. The Costa Mesa man, now 33, was forced to represent himself even though he functions at the mental level of a child and cannot tell time or remember his birthday.

That year the lawsuit was expanded to class-action status, and U.S. District Court Judge Dolly M. Gee ruled in the ACLU’s favor Tuesday. According to the ACLU, it applies to certain detainees now held in Arizona, California and Washington.

The new policy includes competency hearings for detainees and a screening process for serious mental disorders.

A qualified representative will be made available to unrepresented detainees deemed unable to represent themselves, federal officials said.

The new procedures are expected to be fully implemented across the country by the end of this year.

The ACLU was aided in the case by Public Counsel, the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Mental Health Advocacy Services and the law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell.

Ten percent said they’ve been physically abused by U.S. authorities, and 30 percent said they were forced to sign immigration papers they didn’t understand.

Researchers surveyed more than 1,000 deported immigrants for this report from 2010 to 2012, and they found 1 in 4 of these deportees have children under the age of 18 who are U.S. citizens.

Carol Estrada said she can’t imagine being separated from her baby.

“I will do anything for my baby,” said Estrada.

But according to the University of Arizona’s immigration report, in many cases, mothers are separated from their young kids when they’re found in the country illegally.

Estrada said she has no reason to fear deportation.

She’s in the U.S. legally, but she can’t say the same for some family and friends.

“They’re scared to be caught because if they get caught, they’ll be taken to jail,” said Estrada.

She said one of her friends was recently deported.

Her toddler children are U.S. citizens, and Estrada said they are now in CPS custody.

“They’re just little kids starting to grow up,” said Estrada.

According to the researchers from the Migrant Border Crossing study, 25 percent of the deported immigrants surveyed said they’ll cross again within the next week, 50 percent at some other time in the future.

Those with the closest ties to people in the U.S., people like Estrada’s deported friend, were the most sure they’d be back.

“If they consider this their home or if their children are in the United States, they’re going to keep trying, so we’re not going to be able to punish that out of them,” said Joy Olson with the Washington Office of Latin America.

The researchers said the immigration system is flawed.

“Especially with family ties and homes in the U.S., it’s just going to keep causing a self-perpetuating system,” said Jeremy Slack, a lead investigator of the report.

They hope their data will help policy makers better understand immigration trends.

They are heading to Washington D.C. in April to discuss the report.

Guadalupe is an American citizen.

Elvia is not.

The 25-year-old was brought to the United States when she was just 4.

“This is my home. I don’t know Mexico. I don’t remember Mexico.”

The question lawmakers in both Washington and Topeka are dealing with is what to do with families like Elivia’s.

Some are saying it’s time to draft laws that won’t break up her family.

Others say she should pack her bags and self-deport.

“Her whole family should go back,” said Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.

Whether it’s the right thing to do or not, many are trying to determine the impact legalization would have on the economy.

Those against it, like the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), argue that legalization would entice more foreigners to cross the border illegally and thus become a burden to the already ailing U.S. economy by increasing competition with U.S.-born workers and draining government-funded programs.

“Amnesty rewards illegal behavior, encourages more and is fundamentally unfair to those who have come here legally,” Kristen Williamson, a spokeswoman for FAIR said. “This is a largely low-skill, low-wage population that would now be required to file taxes, but would not necessarily be people who are paying net contributions to taxes, so they would be eligible for benefits.”

On the other side of the pole are others, however, who support and strongly advocate the need to legalize immigrants, alleging that it’s the key to vitalize the U.S. economy.

UCLA professor Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda, the author of The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform, is one of them.

Hinojosa-Ojeda says that 11 million immigrants would be the equivalent to more than $1.5 trillion, or roughly one percent, added to the gross domestic product (GDP) in a period of 10 years The U.S.GDP, defined as the output of goods and services produced by labor and property, is approximately $15 trillion, according to the World Bank.

“That means a lot of good things for the economy. It means there is more money circulating in the economy. It means the economy is able to support a lot more jobs, so everybody wins,” Hinojosa-Ojeda said. “One of the reasons we grow and we have GDP growth is because we have new workers. The economy can’t grow if we don’t add these workers.”

In his research, Hinojosa-Ojeda studied three scenarios: the economic impact of a comprehensive immigration reform that would create a path to legalization, a temporary work program with no option to permanent legal status, and the deportation of undocumented immigrants.

He concluded that legalizing immigrants would be more beneficial to the economy by generating additional taxes, increasing consumption and allowing immigrants to climb the occupational ladder, among other things.

Expelling immigrants, on the other hand, would be more expensive, costing $2.6 trillion to the GDP over a period of 10 years, excluding the cost of deportation, the report states.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement says it costs the government an estimated $8,318 to deport each person.

Hinojosa-Ojeda’s study took the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), an amnesty program that legalized approximately about three million immigrants during the Reagan administration, as an example and model to estimate the effects legalized immigrants would have on economy.

“In those three years after the amnesty wages went up on average by 15-20 percent for the undocumented, after having been flat or actually declining for the last 10 years before that,” Hinojosa-Ojeda said.

In a report by the Department of Labor in the mid-90s shows that even though immigrants still earned less than U.S. natives, their wages went up 15 percent few years after being legalized in 1986.

This wage increase, Hinojosa explains, would not only help boost the economy, but it would also decrease unauthorized immigration.

“Ronald Reagan saw the biggest decline ever of undocumented workers crossing the border after IRCA without spending a gazillion dollars on border control,” Hinojosa-Ojeda said. “When you raise the wage floor, minimum wage, you can’t get around exploiting workers. The demand for easily exploitable workers goes away.”

FAIR challenges these facts, saying the11 million unauthorized immigrants demonstrate the opposite of what Hinojosa argues.

“Directly after IRCA, the illegal alien population decreased because three million illegal aliens were given amnesty. That is by no means proof that amnesty stops illegal immigration,” Williamson said. “Now over 25 years after our last mass amnesty and broken promises for enforcement, the illegal alien population stands at nearly 12 million.”

A 2011 report by FAIR states that undocumented immigrants “impose a fiscal burden,” costing the government $113 billion per year in welfare programs. The report also states that immigrants use more welfare programs than those who were born in the United States.

Public Policy Institute of California Research Fellow Laura Hill, co-author of “Immigrant Legalization: Assessing the Labor Market Effects, doesn’t agree with FAIR.  PPIC is a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank based in California.

“Evidence suggests that they don’t become a burden at a higher rate than anyone else,” Hill said. “By large, immigrants are much more likely to be working than natives. They’re more involved in the labor force.”

Hill’s study, however, shows something different from FAIR’s and Hinojosa’s research.

The legalization of undocumented immigrants would have a neutral impact on the economy: “I don’t think there is a big change to the economy taking them from unauthorized to authorized status because we already have a lot of those positive benefits from those same immigrants.”

Hill’s study found that many undocumented immigrants already file federal taxes and pay sales and payroll taxes.

“Legalization is not a bad idea, I am saying that we shouldn’t expect the economy to blossom because of a legalization program,” Hill explained.

Hill also said legalizing immigrants would not increase competition on U.S. citizens in the workforce because: “low-skill workers are not in a position to quickly go out and demand higher wages or apply for better jobs,” she explained.

There would be positive impact on high skill workers who would be able to attain better jobs and wages, Hill said.

While the debate goes on, the real economic effects of legalization will roll out as the details on immigration reform are sorted out in Washington.

“Every girl’s dream,” Melgar said.

In 2010, the family received heart breaking news: Their 4-year-old son was diagnosed with leukemia.

“It has been tough, difficult, but he is a strong boy,” Melgar said.

To help her son get the treatment he needed, Idania Melgar had to reveal something she had been hiding — she was living here illegally.

“I decided to come to Miss Fergeson and tell her about my case, and she accepted,” Melgar said.

Angela Ferguson is an immigration attorney. Melgar met with her to find out how she could become a U.S. citizen. Her parents brought her here from Honduras illegally when she was 17-years-old.

In March, she will face a judge, who will decide whether she will be deported back to Honduras, possibly leaving her son who is sick behind.

The thought gives her nightmares.

“It is a horrible dream,” she said.

Ferguson’s caseload is overflowing with stories similar to Idania’s. Immigration caseloads are so large in Missouri and Kansas that offices on both sides of the state line have doubled in size. Kansas City’s Immigration Court is only a few years old, and it is backlogged with cases.

“We have a 55 mile-per-hour immigration law right now, and we need to increase the speed. We need to increase the number of visas, the way people are processed, (the current system) is not logical anymore,” Ferguson said.

Ferguson said it is time to expand the current immigration system so families are not torn apart. Idania Melgar hopes her family can stay together.

Here are 5 highlights, based on research from the Pew Research Hispanic Center, to help shed some light on the issue and the 11 million people who may soon be able to call the U.S. home

1) Who are the undocumented?

 Many news reports cited the fact that such a plan would assist 11 million undocumented immigrants, a number that, for many, conjures up images of border-crossers entering the country illegally from Mexico. However, Pew reports that illegal immigration, in general, and, specifically from Mexico, has dropped significantly since 2007 possibly due to tougher border security and a weaker U.S. economy.

Mexicans do make up the majority of unauthorized immigrants (58 percent), but a considerable number of people from Latin America (23 percent), Asia (11 percent), as well as Europe and Canada(4 percent) also live in the U.S. without papers.

Most undocumented immigrants live with a family and nearly half live with a spouse and children, which is a greater share than the national population. Last summer, the Obama administration deferred deportation for children that arrived in the country illegally.

Around 9 million families are “mixed-status,” with citizen children and undocumented parents, according to the Pew Research Center.

Activists gather in front of the White House to celebrate the Obama administration’s announcement about deferred deportation of undocumented youth. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

2) Where do undocumented immigrants live?

By far, California hosts the largest number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. with an estimated 2.5 million living within the state’s borders. The high numbers have led the Golden State to enact some of the most liberal immigration laws in the country including a Dream Act that offers young undocumented students financial aid to attend college. 

Texas, which has a history of tougher views against undocumented immigrants, follows California with around 1.6 million. Florida, New York and Virginia also have a sizable population but their numbers are declining, according to Pew.

Every state in the U.S. houses unauthorized immigrants but increasingly, southeast and south central states like North Carolina, Georgia, Oklahoma and Louisiana are becoming top destinations. Despite passing one of the strictest anti-illegal immigration laws in the country, Arizona’s illegal population comes in at number 8 on the list.

3) What jobs do undocumented immigrants work?

Because they have no Social Security numbers, undocumented immigrants tend to gravitate towards lower-skill jobs that do not require formal registration like farming and construction. The agriculture industry relies heavily on them which has led both President Obama and the bipartisan senators to propose a fast-track to citizenship for eligible undocumented agriculture workers including dairy workers.

They also tend to work as brickmasons, drywall installers, dishwashers and other low-skill jobs, but both blueprints for immigration reform recommend a crackdown on employers who hire undocumented workers.

The undocumented do break into white-collar jobs, with Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Jose Antonio Vargas as a prime example, but they often cannot advance without accreditation, licenses, or access to board exams. About 340,000 unauthorized immigrants work in management, business and finance.

Most undocumented bring in around $36,000 a year in pay. 

An undocumented mother packs up belongings as her daughter Luna, 7, looks on in their apartment in Aurora, Colorado. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

4) How many undocumented immigrants leave?

Last year, the Obama administration removed a record number of criminal undocumented immigrants, about 392,000 according to the Department of Homeland Security. The majority were from Mexico but immigrants from locations as far-flung and unlikely as Tajikistan, Israel and Gabon were returned to their native countries.

RELATED: Halting deportation free flights for undocumented immigrants – good or bad?

Some migrants voluntarily return to their homelands but it is hard to estimate just how many. The Pew Center puts the number of Mexicans who voluntarily return between 5 and 35 percent.

5) What does the public want when it comes to immigration reform?

While immigration has taken center stage in Washington, most Americans are more concerned with the economy and the deficit than immigration. Latinos, the community that fueled President Obama’s re-election, also said jobs and the economy trumped immigration, even though many said it was an extremely personal issue for them.

According to the Pew Center, most U.S. adults favor a dual approach that focuses on both tougher border security and a pathway to citizenship.

Major Republican players such as Sen. Marco Rubio pivoted on earlier positions to back the plan, indicating, perhaps, a shift in the GOP’s stance on the issue. But, what is most striking is how similar the senators’ proposals resemble Obama’s 2011 plan on immigration — here is a look at some of the points where the plans overlap and where they differ.

BORDER SECURITY

Similar: Both plans insist on strong-arm border security tactics: more border patrol agents, drones and surveillance equipment. And don’t wear out your welcome — both plans recommend swift action to remove immigrants who have overstayed their visa.

Different: The senators  recommend re-training for agents to protect against racial profiling, a measure inspired by Arizona’s SB 1070 law.

Major Change: The senators’ plan offers a pathway to citizenship contingent on border security. That means a coalition of governors and law enforcement officials must certify that the borders are secure and THEN the government can move forward on a path to citizenship.

UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS IN U.S.

Similar: In both plans, undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S. can eventually become  citizens provided they register with the government, pay penalties as well as back taxes, and undergo background checks. They must also learn English and the senators recommend a civics lesson as well.

Once the requirements are complete, undocumented immigrants go to the back of the line behind legal immigrants and only after every legal immigrant receives their green card will an undocumented immigrant be eligible.

Different: Nothing

Major Change: Previously, Senators like Marco Rubio were outspoken critics of a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, stressing that it was a reward for illegal acts.  In negotiations, he may have pushed the group to accept the stricter border enforcement policies in exchange for agreement on this point.

DREAMERS AND AGRICULTURAL WORKERS

Similar: Both plans provide a fast-track path to citizenship for those children brought to the U.S. by undocumented immigrants, otherwise known as DREAMers.

Agricultural workers are also offered a separate channel for citizenship, provided farms and other employers show no American worker was available for the job.

Different: President Obama asks that DREAMers serve in the military or pursue higher education as a prerequisite for citizenship.

Major Change: The senators’ plan calls for undocumented agricultural workers who knowingly came here illegally to be folded into national discussion on immigration and granted a path to citizenship. It’s a sign that farms and the business communities are weighing in on the conversation.

NEW IMMIGRANTS

Similar: Both plans want to encourage the best and the brightest immigrants to come to the U.S. with a premium on foreign students studying in the STEM fields. Foreign students in American universities who complete PhDs and some Masters programs in science, technology, engineering and mathematics will find a shiny new green card stapled to their diploma.

Easier said than done — both plans aim to reduce backlogs in immigration proceedings to more quickly reunite U.S. citizens with their overseas family members.

Different: President Obama pitched an idea called “Start-Up Visa.”  Foreign entrepreneurs build new businesses in the U.S. with backing by American investors. If they flop, they pack up and head home. If the company succeeds, they’ll win a ticket to remain permanently. 

Major Change: The senators suggested basing the annual caps on the ebbs and flow of the economy: When there are more jobs in the U.S., more immigrants can come and vice versa. It’s an innovative but possibly chaotic break from the system of static caps already in place.

EMPLOYMENT VERIFICATION

Similar: The system that exists now to verify the identities of undocumented workers doesn’t adequately address identity theft and fraud. Both the senators and President Obama suggest an upgrade to the E-Verify system and a streamlined process to redress mistakes.

Different: Bosses who knowingly hire undocumented workers will be punished. President Obama suggests a fine and a civil penalty while the senators demand criminal penalties.

Major Change: The president suggests giving current undocumented workers a short window of opportunity to register in the national database before they’re deemed unauthorized. Workers found to be using fake Social Security cards or false identities will be promptly punished.

SAME-SEX FAMILIES 

Different: The Obama plan will allow an LGBT foreign partner of a same-sex couple to apply for a green card like opposite-sex couples can receive. The Senate plan does not make such provisions for same-sex couples.

Major Change: For first time, LGBT American citizens will be able to participate in process to confer citizenship to their romantic partners the way straight couples have been able to do through marriage.

Tagged: deportation, illegal., immigration, lindsey graham, Marco Rubio, McCain, Obama, plans, start-up visa, undocumented, visa ]]> http://nbclatino.com/2013/01/29/obamas-vs-senators-immigration-reform-plan-6-points-on-what-overlaps-what-differs/feed/ 1 US Immigration Reform nadinenatour http://nbclatino.com/2013/01/28/torn-apart-by-immigration-families-hope-to-be-reunited/ http://nbclatino.com/2013/01/28/torn-apart-by-immigration-families-hope-to-be-reunited/#comments Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:59:29 +0000 Kristina Puga http://nbclatino.com/?p=48717 Read More]]> For the 11 million undocumented immigrants and their families who live in the United States, the senators’ and President Barack Obama’s plan for immigration reform is a window of hope they can be reunited with their loved ones after years of heartache. Since nothing has been passed yet, they still await their fate.

“As a mom, it’s a heartbreaking,” says Jennifer Martinez, breaking into tears.

The 33-year-old lost her husband and father of her four children about a year ago to deportation. She says it’s been a constant struggle. Martinez used to be a stay-at-home mom, dedicating all of her time to her kids, while her husband worked full-time at a restaurant to support them. Now, she works two jobs, as a receptionist from 8:30am to 1pm and a nurse from 2pm to 2am, and she says if she’s lucky, she gets to see her kids about an hour a day.

“Instead of asking for toys, they ask if they can have their dad back,” says Martinez. “My 6-year-old suffers from anxiety. She thinks I might not come get her. I have to take a half hour to reassure them that I’m coming home. Their dad went to work and never came home.”

Martinez fell in love with her husband when they worked at his aunt’s restaurant – they were both 16. Now she barely has time to talk to him on the phone, and he’s making the equivalent of about $26 a week making doors and windows about an hour outside Mexico City.

“There’s no guarantee that he’ll ever be able to come home again,” she sobs. “He has a 10-year bar — so for 10 years there’s nothing we can do. The most frustrating part is that he is not a criminal — not even a traffic ticket. Only criminals can see a judge — my husband who isn’t a criminal, can’t even see a judge [for a hearing].”

Jazmin Zaragoza is a 19-year-old who lived without her mom since age 11 due to deportation. They crossed the Mexico-U.S. border together when she was 5. It was her mom’s second time getting caught trying to join her husband in the states after he had an accident at work. Her mom was sent to Mexico and Zaragoza got a green card, as the official said it wasn’t her decision to come here.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

She remembers the good days, eight years ago, when they would all have dinner together.

“Every Saturday, we would go to McDonald’s for breakfast,” says Zaragoza. “Now my dad is at work all day. We hardly see each other. We don’t have dinner together.”

She says her brothers, who are American citizens because they were born in the U.S., unlike her, who had to apply for citizenship via a green card, opted to stay with their mother in Morelia, Mexico, because they were so young when she was deported. Zaragoza originally went to live with her mom too, but felt an incessant drive to return to her dad in Tulsa, Okla. to continue her education.

“It makes me feel bad as the oldest sister,” says Zaragoza, who is a sophomore in college and has plans to study law after this experience. “I’m receiving the education they deserve [too].”

She says her brothers Daniel, 13, and Steven, 10, already forgot how to speak English and don’t want to come back to a country they consider bad for separating their family.

“My mom needs pills for depression and anxiety, and my dad had to see a therapist,” she says of her parents, whose 20th wedding anniversary just passed. “Even now, he has depression and anxiety — he can’t sleep at night.”

Angelo, an undocumented immigrant who prefers not to use his last name, immigrated to New York City from Puebla, Mexico when he was only 14. Today, he is 37, and the founder of an award-winning non-profit organization that helps thousands of Latino students who are struggling in school be able to go to college.

He says he came here by himself, became homeless and worked in the basement of a supermarket, but because of the kindness of a stranger was able to attend college.

“It gave me the opportunity to help other students go to college,” says Angelo, who is hoping for more opportunities with immigration reform. “It would help me be able to vote… being undocumented, you’re always afraid… [It’s] also traumatic to the children… because their parents are undocumented, they’re feeling left out…”

Angelo says for 23 years, he has not been able to see his sick mother, and he does not know if he will ever have the opportunity to see her alive. The only consolation is that he is able to help his community in his new home.

“Whenever I see the smile of a child who is able to go to college, that’s my million dollar paycheck,” says Angelo, who after more than two decades paying U.S. taxes and being part of the culture considers himself a “U.S. citizen without a status.”  “We follow the rules. [Many] are great examples and great citizens but lack the status. Many of the children of immigrants have lost their mother’s language and adopted the U.S. language but are still undocumented.”

Like Angelo, Martinez, the mother of four who can only hope for her husband’s return home, also hopes for a more complete comprehensive immigration reform.

“They need to understand the faces of all the kids, wives — our lives our completely destroyed,” she says. “[The pathway to become a citizen] needs to be in black and white… there are so many gray areas.”