Avoid Emily Bazar from USA Today: What the Heck is an "Illegal Student?"

by: DreamActivist

Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 13:14:58 PM EST

Would a truly reputable national newspaper use the N-word to describe African-Americans?

I doubt it.

The USA Today article “Groups try to delay deportations of illegal students” gets it wrong once again by calling immigrant students in the United States “illegal.”

BEWARE: USA Today reporter, Emily Bazar thinks it is alright to label young immigrants without papers as “illegal immigrants” because NumbersUSA and NCLR had a webcast where this was decided. Here is the email to prove this.

But wait, I get the “illegal immigrant” because that slur is familiar. However, WHAT is an “illegal student?”

Emily Bazar (ebazar@usatoday.com), specifically, has also forced undocumented students to reveal their true identity to make a point in her article. For this particular article, Ms. Bazar spoke to our Communications Director and when he told her that she could not use his last name, Bazar retaliated by saying that USA Today had “national standards” and policies to be adhered to. That is amusing, given how even New York Times has been hesitant about revealing the identity of undocumented students. I wonder if these standards come straight from the hate-organization Numbers USA, funded by the known racist John Tanton or FAIR, who is quoted in the article saying the same things that have been debunked here.

Take action here to tell USA Today to stop competing with the archaic immigration system and drop the use of the word ‘illegal’

Student Activists Shutdown Tancredo's Nativism

by: DreamActivist

Sat Apr 18, 2009 at 19:17:35 PM EST

Former Congressperson, Tom Tancredo, was not allowed to speak at a recent event in University of North Carolina hosted by the Youth for Western Civilization [Read: Youth Against Multiculturalism and Diversity].

Protestors shutdown the event through their non-violent chanting. Someone threw a brick through a window. And just for that, all hell broke lose or so the media spins. Our resident anti-immigrant demagogue William Gheen was quick to compare it to the persecution of Jews.

That's really a case of the pot calling the kettle black given that his organization--ALIPAC--has ties to right wing hate groups according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Setback for free speech?  Boo-hoo. Get over it.

At least Tancredo and his cronies do not have to worry about being invaded and detained by ICE whenever they practice their hate free speech.

This is also the same Tom Tancredo that asked ICE to arrest and detain college immigration advocates when they were testifying for the DREAM Act in 2007.

Apparently, ‘free speech’ is only convenient when the speech in question is in agreement to one’s own sentiments and belief systems.

The Rise of the Online Undocumented Youth Movement

by: DreamActivist

Tue Dec 02, 2008 at 14:17:40 PM EST

Cross-posted at DreamACTivist.

After the defeat of the DREAM Act last year, William Gheen, the leader of ALIPAC, who deplores undocumented youth and wants to deport all such students, issued a call for us to stay down: “we should never gloat, but it is time to rub these losses in to our opposition. They need to stay down, instead of forcing us to knock them down again and again.”

These are the values of ALIPAC—immense hatred towards children that were brought here through no choice of their own, American children who want to serve this country, who are the future leaders of this land.

The subaltern has answered Gheen’s coarse demands. In one year since the failure of the DREAM Act, undocumented students have come together in larger numbers than ever before, setting up organizations, networking online, making videos, blogging and petitioning for change.

Youth in the usually-somber waiting rooms of history are bustling with renewed enthusiasm and energy. Trapped as a marginal status, ignored by the mainstream media, with their backs to the wall and everything to lose, undocumented youth are emerging as leaders in their own movement. Take a look at the Ideas for Change campaign at Change.org–the DREAM Act is ahead by a landslide (don’t forget to register and vote), thanks in no part, to the efforts of undocumented students and allies. Following the early success of the Change.org organizing, DreamACTivist and Co. will be back with a spree of actions very soon so remember to get on their twitter or join the new BAMN DREAM fanpage.

In a paper on alternative nationalisms this past year, I wrote:

The ‘politics of waiting’ initiated by stringent United States immigration laws has indeed spurred the rise of a community of undocumented students. United in their desire to be recognized as Americans who deserve the chance to apply for citizenship, they question the ‘alien’ assumption of their character, the ‘otherness’ label that is given to them as an ‘a priori.’

The beneficiaries of the federal DREAM Act are anything but alien—from their slight to unaccented discourses, their spirit to fight their own battles, survival in the face of great opposition and obstacles, these students are American in every way besides a piece of paper: a piece of paper, a green card, that would confer the arbitrary privilege of ‘citizenship’ on these students, a social construct that students are organizing and fighting to achieve by all means. As the Oscar Wilde quote goes “we live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities.” In effect, these students are fighting to inherit a large tax burden, serve and die for a country that refuses to acknowledge them, pay hefty loans and mortgages, and to be the force of change and innovation in an eroding Pax Americana. ‘Freedom’ does come with its burden of ironies.

When and how did this happen? Roberto Gonzales traces the emergence of undocumented youth organizing to the immigration marches in 2006. This is not to say that undocumented youth organizing did not exist prior to that movement, but that they cemented a place and social category for themselves. Gonzales writes,

“Civic activity has been on the rise among undocumented youth on college campuses and in communities. New generations of activists are being born out of the very struggle to become ‘American’ and in the process, they are rewriting their own stories.”

Branching out across the United States and the web, undocumented students are now using emerging media technologies to organize for the DREAM Act. And the subaltern is not monolithic but it is united in its goals — Take a look at SIM from Massachusetts, New York Student Youth Leadership Council, the UCLA-based Underground Undergrads, BAMN on the DREAM Act, A DREAM Deferred, DreamACTivist, One DREAM 2009 and the main online social network–DAP. This small list is just scratching the surface of the many student groups that exist. These are youth based movements—online and offline—led and charged primarily by undocumented students. The subaltern is speaking, telling her/his stories and logically putting forth arguments for change.

Out of the Closet - Queer Undocumented Students Speak About DREAMs

by: DreamActivist

Fri Nov 14, 2008 at 16:35:32 PM EST

Crossposted at OurChart.com and DreamActivist.org - Feel free to disseminate.

In light of the massive uprising against Prop 8 in California and similar attacks on LGBT communities, this segment is dedicated to the queer and 'illegal' lives of our undocumented LGBT youth.

President-elect Barack Obama has stated that undocumented students raised in the United States are “Americans for all intent and purposes.” Yet, these undocumented American are punished for the alleged transgressions of their parents, and face many barriers to their DREAMs upon graduation from high school—often they cannot attend college, drive or work legally, obtains loans, or even legalize their status. While illegal presence is not a crime, anti-immigrant hysteria has effectively given them the tag of ‘criminal.’

The situation gets worse with the heteronormativity of U.S. immigration laws. The fact that even LGBT immigration organizations like ‘Immigration Equality’ and the elitist 'Human Rights' Campaign pay scant attention and continue to ignore the plight of undocumented gay students in the United States makes the situation even more precarious. This is not just a gay issue or Latino issue; it is a human rights issue and undocumented queer students are caught in the middle of two ensuing culture wars: the battle for gay rights and immigrant rights, neither of which is seen as a civil and human rights struggle by the mainstream.

In this entry, you will come across undocumented LGBT youth from diverse backgrounds, states and circumstances that have come together in these waiting rooms of history to share the limbo of their lives. Juan and Felipe depict how love cannot be illegal, Mohammad expresses how going back to Iran is certainly not an option, Prerna represents a life in isolation with a desire to succeed against all odds, Karla wants to serve this country and Moreno is currently in high school with dreams of becoming an artist.

Making College Inaccessible for Immigrant Students One Lawsuit at a Time

by: DreamActivist

Tue Sep 16, 2008 at 14:27:20 PM EST

Disclaimer: This issue does not relate to me. I am not an AB-540 student and nor have I ever benefited from it. In fact, I paid International Student fees for my Graduate education so I should have a major problem with AB-540 right? No, it makes me mad that people are scapegoating fellow college students who have worked really hard to get where they are .

Seriously, college education should be free for all and then we wouldn’t be fighting over the small piece of the pie. Alas …

Kris Kobach finally got his first and last victory in the battle to end in-state tuition for undocumented students. The 3rd District California Court of Appeal issued a decision yesterday that challenges a state law allowing some undocumented students to pay in-state college tuition. (Explanation here)

After losing the battle in district courts and appeals court in various states, Kansas Chairperson of the Republican Party, Kris Kobach made one final appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, only to be turned down. Obviously, the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court had nothing to say on the issue that hasn’t already been said by the district and appeals courts: the plaintiffs do not have a right to sue.

He vowed to keep trying to make life more difficult for undocumented students or immigrants without legal status (whom he would call ILLEGAL students) and collect more plaintiffs in order to sue states for providing in-state tuition to undocumented students who had graduated from those state high schools (i.e. in California, your eligibility for in-state tuition is determined by whether you have attended a California high school for 3 or more years).

(While we are on the topic of “illegal,” for those who don’t know, Kris Kobach is the GOP politician that sent out emails boasting about voter caging–an ILLEGAL tactic employed by the Republican Party to purge likely-Democrat voters from the polls. I thought ‘illegal is illegal’ - Why is this guy still allowed to roam around free after disenfranchising thousands of voters?!)

While the DREAM Act does not grant instate-tuition rights to undocumented students, opponents of the legislation have effectively spread myths purporting that “illegal aliens can get instate-tuition anywhere” with passage of the legislation. This is baseless and untrue–in-state tuition and residency determinations is a state prerogative. Eleven states currently provide in-state tuition to children without legal status in the United States (Texas, California, Utah, Washington, New York, Oklahoma, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Nebraska.) ALL legal challenges and lawsuits filed against these states had been dismissed by courts until yesterday when the on-crack judges wanting some fame of their own reversed a decision by Yolo Superior Court Judge Thomas Warriner in 2006 that upheld the AB-540 tuition law passed by the Legislature in 2001.

While the courts in California battle over the issue, undocumented students are expected to continue paying in-state tuition till a final ruling is given on this matter. That is what I gathered from ImmigrationProf. (I would suggest that the AB-540 students hustle with their education and take as many units as possible while they can at lower prices, to stay on the safe side)!

Below is some material that I had published earlier to provide a better background on the in-state tuition debate.

BACKGROUND

For a legal background of the in-state tuition debate, we first look to Vlandis v. Kline et Al (1973), in which two students who had recently established residency in Connecticut brought suit against the state under § 1983, alleging that the provisions of 1971 Conn. Pub. Acts § 126(a), which created an irrebuttable presumption of nonresidency for purposes of determining tuition between residents and non-residents in the state’s universities, violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the suit—“the state was forbidden by the Due Process Clause to deny an individual the resident rates on the basis of a permanent and irrebuttable presumption of nonresidence when that presumption was not necessarily or universally true in fact.” The court concluded that due process required that students should have the opportunity to present evidence of their bona fide residency within the state for in-state tuition purposes.

This holds true for undocumented students—children that are brought up in a particular state, and attend and graduate from secondary schools in that state should indeed be deemed residents for tuition purposes. Most statutes that give undocumented students instate-tuition are based on this premise. After all, as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Plyler v. Doe:

1. The undocumented status of these children vel non does not establish a sufficient rational basis for denying them benefits that the State affords other residents.
2. Neither is there any merit to the claim that undocumented children are appropriately singled out because their unlawful presence within the United States renders them less likely than other children to remain within the State’s boundaries and to put their education to productive social or political use within the State.

Undocumented or Illegal is not an immutable characteristic for these students—it is subject to change. The U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the ‘illegal alien’ child of today could be the U.S. citizen of tomorrow and there was no way of determining that the undocumented child would in fact be deported hence, “it would of course be most difficult for the State to justify a denial of education to a child enjoying an inchoate federal permission to remain.” Similarly, since deportation is a federal procedure and until it is completed in cases of individual undocumented students, it is impossible for a state to deem that a person is a ‘non-resident’ for tuition purposes because s/he may just indefinitely remain in the state after establishing it as home. Hence, granting in-state tuition to undocumented students based on their residency in the state becomes a rational and reasonable objective for the state.

South Carolina Becomes First State to Bar Undocumented Students

by: DreamActivist

Thu May 29, 2008 at 15:36:40 PM EST

Stuck in the deep recesses of the South and in a horserace to appear tough on immigration, the South Carolina Senate has approved a get-tough on immigration measure that among other things, would bar undocumented students from higher education in the state.

S 392 which may be signed as early as next week reads: 

SECTION 17. Chapter 101, Title 59 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding: "Section 59-101-430. (A) A person who is not lawfully present in the United States is not eligible to attend a public institution of higher learning in this State, as defined in Section 59-103-5. The trustees of a public institution of higher learning in this State shall develop and institute a process by which lawful presence in the United States is verified. (B) A person not lawfully present in the United States is not eligible on the basis of residence for a public higher education benefit including, but not limited to, scholarships, financial aid, grants, or resident tuition."

It is a sad day for DREAMers in South Carolina but also a depressing loss for the state to assist in creating a permanent underclass of undocumented Americans. After investing in these students through K-12, South Carolina loses this investment by declaring that the students have no right to pursue higher education and realize their dreams.

Goof-up - Arkansas Governor on Instate-Tuition for Undocumented Students

by: DreamActivist

Wed May 28, 2008 at 14:35:00 PM EST

The Associated Press and several other news outlets picking up the AP are quoting the Arkansas Governor Beebee for stating that a "legal opinion he signed while he served as the state's attorney general in 2005 clearly showed giving illegal immigrants in-state tuition likely would violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment."

I was immediately curious as to how someone could possibly conceive that instate-tuition for undocumented students would violate the 14th Amendment. It made little sense--if anything, the opposite was closer to the truth. And I was correct. This is what the Governor actually wrote in his 2005 legal opinion: 

"First, it is my opinion that the amendment adequately resolves the issue of possible violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. Both undocumented aliens and U.S. citizens who meet the requirements of attending high school in Arkansas can obtain resident tuition rates and eligibility for scholarships through HB 1525 on the same basis, following the amendment. Because there is no unequal or disparate treatment based on alienage and both groups or classes are treated equally, there is no denial of equal protection. Accordingly, it is my opinion that the amended bill would withstand scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution."

Clearly, either the Governor is being quoted wrongly by media outlets or he has conveniently forgotton his legal opinion in the frenzy to scapegoat immigrant students.

The federal statute in question during instate-tuition debates is 8 U.S.C. § 1623, which 10 states have already circurmvented. Legal opinion on whether instate-tuition for undocumented students violates that federal statute is unresolved and varied at best. Till now, both the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville and the University of Central Arkansas in Conway had offered undocumented students in-state tuition rates. That is about to change.

Action Alert - North Carolina Banning Undocumented Students

by: DreamActivist

Thu May 22, 2008 at 13:22:25 PM EST

North Carolina alone is moving ahead with an interpretation of a federal law that the state says bars illegal immigrants from attending community colleges, even if the students pay more than the cost of their education.

The new policy, (PDF) approved May 13 by the North Carolina Community College System, comes after six months of political and legal controversy on the topic, but it is unlikely to be the last word in an area where federal courts and immigration officials have offered little guidance to states.

Practically speaking, the decision’s effect will be limited. It doesn’t apply to students attending English as a Second Language classes or vocational training, for instance. Only 112 North Carolina community college students who pursued academic credit last year - out of a total of 296,520 - likely were illegal immigrants, according to the community college system.

But symbolically, the policy is “insulting” to Latinos, said Tony Asion, executive director of El Pueblo, a Raleigh-based non-profit group focused on developing the Latino community. He pointed out that, before the change, undocumented students were allowed to enroll but had to pay out-of-state tuition, which is set at 40 percent above cost that the colleges spend to educate them. Other North Carolina residents get a discount.

Admitting undocumented students “isn’t taking any money from anyone. It isn’t taking any (class) space from anyone. The reason (for the change) is: ‘We just don’t want these people in our schools,’” Asion said.

Read more here

1. What to DO - CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES

To find your elected
official, go to: http://www.ncleg.net/ and click on Representation.

Contact NC Speaker of the House & President Pro Tem

Contact Speaker of the House Rep. Joe Hackney (919-733-3451) Joeh@ncleg.net and
President Pro Tem Sen. Marc Basnight (919-733-6854, Marcb@ncleg.net) to let them know that you do not want the NC Legislature to ban undocumented students from our community colleges and universities.

Contact Governor Easley (1-800-662-7952-NC only, 919-733-4240, or 919-733-5811) to thank him or supporting undocumented students through his public statements. Ask him to continue his leadership in support of access to higher education for immigrant students.

Sample letter to send to your representatives:

This is in regards to the proposal to ban undocumented students from higher education institutions in North Carolina. We firmly oppose this move as it is a wrong interpretation of federal immigration law, a waste of public resources and serves no compelling state interest.

The Attorney General of North Carolina has wrongly interpreted the 1996 federal law, spinning it to mean that undocumented students should be denied postsecondary education benefits when the law only states that undocumented students shall not qualify for any post-secondary benefit that are not already available to U.S. citizens and nationals. Post-secondary education, in and of itself, is already available to all U.S. citizens and nationals.

Additionally, an ICE memo recently clarified that United States federal law did not prohibit undocumented students from attending colleges in America—the matter is up to the sole discretion of the postsecondary educational institution.

Here is a look at undocumented students in North Carolina by the numbers that shows how admitting undocumented students is a net-benefit, a profit-making opportunity for higher education in North Carolina:

• 27 - UNC system students who are illegal immigrants, out of 200,000

• 340 - Community college students who are illegal immigrants, out of 271,000

• $5,300 - Annual cost of educating a full-time student at a community college

• $7,465 - Out-of-state tuition illegal immigrants pay at community college

Since undocumented students make up less than one-tenth of one percent of students in the North Carolina system and do not burden taxpayers because they are not eligible for financial aid or grants, it would be ludicrous not to educate them. Moreover, since they have to pay ‘out of state’ tuition, it more than covers the cost of their enrollment. There can be no justification for denying higher education to students–regardless of immigration status–if they merit those spots under status quo federal and state law.

ICE - Undocumented students not barred from seeking higher education

by: DreamActivist

Tue May 13, 2008 at 23:34:27 PM EST

For the past few months, we have witnessed conflicting points of views expressed by the public officials in North Carolina on whether to allow undocumented students access to postsecondary education. Yesterday, the U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) clarified once and for all that federal law did not prohibit undocumented immigrants from attending colleges.

Last year, David J. Sullivan, assistant to the president for legal affairs for the North Carolina community college system, wrote to the leaders of the 58 community colleges that, “notwithstanding any policy of the local board, colleges should immediately begin admitting undocumented individuals” as out-of-state residents. Governor Easley agreed while the systemwide President, Martin Lancaster issued a statement saying

"For North Carolina to be competitive in a global economy, it must depend on a knowledge-based workforce which makes it imperative that every future worker in North Carolina receive as much education as possible.  To deny a significant portion of tomorrow’s workforce any higher education opportunities will not only hurt these young people who came to North Carolina through no fault of their own, but it will also significantly diminish their incomes forever. The consequences to North Carolina are reduced tax collections and potential payments for social services and incarceration long into the future.  This will hit the pocketbooks of those who now oppose maximizing the earning capacity of everyone who lives in North Carolina. This ill-advised position would hurt North Carolina and its economic future and will increase the tax burden of those now screaming the loudest."

Yet, this past week the Attorney General of North Carolina wrongly interpreted federal immigration law, stating that it prohibited undocumented immigrants from attending colleges and North Carolina must stop doing so immediately. This misperception is shared by many and it is about time our officials responsible for upholding immigration law clarified that there was no law on the books that prohibited postsecondary education of undocumented immigrants.