A common Democratic party narrative told to Latinos, especially in Arizona, is they should register as Democrats and vote a straight Democratic ticket, because those evil racist Republicans want to racially profile them and deport all Latinos. This is a blatant exaggeration, an obvious attempt to keep Latinos on the ‘liberal hacienda’, as few – if any – Republicans are seeking to deport Latino citizens.

A May 2001 in-dept study by Pew Research suggests a more accurate narrative to describe Republican attitudes on immigration: ‘a majority of Republicans favor immigration reform, including a path to legalization for unauthorized immigrants, and as with Americans in general, a strong majority of Republicans favor more immigration enforcement.’ The Pew Research poll also found that even among the most staunch conservatives, there is a 49%/49% split on immigration reform. Republicans are clearly not monolithic on immigration reform, and statistics like Pew Research’s hardly support any notion that Republicans are anti-Latino.

Contrary to the Democratic narrative, Democratic administrations have deported more Latino immigrants than Republican administrations. Obama has deported 1.5 million immigrants, mostly Latinos, and leading many to dub Obama our “deporter-in-chief.”

Which president has deported the most Latino citizens? Though Obama has deported more Latino citizens than any president in recent history, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt forced out more Latino citizens than any other president in history. During the great depression, a program called “the great repatriation” forced approximately one million “Mexicans” to leave the U.S. either by force or by making discrimination so pervasive that many could not find employment and simply left. Various historians estimate 60% of those who left were U.S. Citizens. The “great repatriation” was authorized by Herbert Hoover, but mostly took place during FDR’s administration.

Who is America’s worst racial profiler? Immediately for most, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio comes to mind. Sheriff Joe has become infamous among Latinos for his trademark immigration sweeps of Hispanic neighborhoods, looking for minor traffic and other infractions as a pretext to investigate immigration status. A recent study conducted by an outside police executive, and authorized by the U.S. Department of Justice, found Latinos in Maricopa County are from four to nine times more likely stopped by police than non-Latinos, and 20% of Latino traffic stops lacked probable cause. However, despite Joe Arpaio’s notoriety he is not America’s worst racial profiler.

However, the title of “racial-profiler-in-chief” rightly belongs to an Arizona Democrat named Janet Napolitano! As Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, she head’s America’s largest law enforcement agency, which includes Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). ICE and CBP are notorious for the use of racial profiling in immigration enforcement, but these agencies are only part of the reason Janet Napolitano merits this notoriety. Napolitano has very aggressively rolled out the Secure Communities program, in which state and local law enforcement share fingerprint data from local jails, even though this program has generated widespread complaints about the racial profiling S-COMM has fueled.

According to a recent study of Secure Communities, 93% of those arrested under S-COMM are Latinos, while Latinos represent 78% of the unauthorized immigrant community and 3,600 U.S. citizens have been falsely arrested. One revealing statistic is that nearly 50% of those arrested under s-comm were NOT jailed for committing a crime but rather traffic or similar non-criminal violations of the law, which confirms pervasive complaints that Latinos are being jailed rather than cited for such minor traffic infractions as cracked windshields, broken tail lights (including on bicycles), frost on car windows, expired vehicle registration, speeding, etc. State and local police don’t usually have the ability to check immigration status of those they stop, but jails do. It’s apparent that increasingly Latinos who are stopped for traffic infractions are being jailed rather than cited so their immigration status can be investigated, which is racial profiling because outcomes of traffic stops are different for Latinos, and some police will target Latinos for traffic stops on the suspicion they may be unauthorized immigrants. Less than one in five Latinos are unauthorized, so the result is that thousands of law abiding citizens are subjected to the humiliation of jail for routine police encounters such as traffic infractions!

Secure Communities has become so controversial that some states, including Massachusetts and New York have objected to participation, while other states already in the program, such as Illinois, have sought to withdraw. In response to widespread complaints about racial profiling, lack of following priorities, etc. DHS created a review panel, but in the end their recommendations were watered down, and the only change is that DHS agreed not to deport low level offenders for traffic infractions until they had been convicted. Five members of the panel were so outraged at the ‘whitewash job’ they quit the panel in disgust, while the other 14 panel members who didn’t quit were very critical of DHS.

Secure Communities started out as voluntary, but under Napolitano states now have no option but to participate and remain in the program if they wish to opt-out as they were promised under Bush. Like the great repatriation, which began under Hoover, Secure Communities began under a Republican administration as a pilot voluntary program, but vastly expanded under a Democratic administration.

Words are strong and can persuade.   They can create division or they can unite.  Words can hurt or they can heal. It is the rhetoric that will drive Latinos away from the GOP, many contend.  What many journalists and bloggers, and other people scream about is what is not being said regarding Latinos. And it matters. The Liberals state that GOP Presidential candidates cannot count on the Latino vote because of the rhetoric that has instilled fear in the Latino community.  They are correct.  However, what they fail to address is that actions speak louder than words.  Actions brought to light by the present administration are dangerous to Latinos because they are perilous to the Latino families and community.  In implementing Secured Communities, which by all accounts was supposed to secure the U.S. and Communities across the nation, the Obama Administration has managed to use Secured Communities to deport Latinos (U.S. citizens and not), separate families, and drown out opportunity.  In fact, this Administration has done more to discourage, separate families, and harm the Latino community than any other previous Administration, Republican or Democrat.

In a study done by the Berkley School of Law and the Cardozo Law Center, the Obama Administration deported 400,000 Latinos in one year using the Secured Communities as an excuse.  My reaction at first was great, it is doing what it intended.  Secured Communities, as it was introduced by President Bush in April 2008, was intended to help keep our communities safe by identifying those in the U.S. who were criminal illegal aliens, and those who were in the U.S. with the intent of furthering any bombing or terrorists activities.  However, the present Administration took it a step further and began mass deportations of Latinos.

The use of the word “discretionary,” in the law allows (as it is in SB 1070) authorities to apprehend, question, detain, and often times deport, those looking “illegal.”  This has never been defined exactly.  Instead, authorities are given “discretion” to question those looking “illegal.”

No one in the media like CNN, NBC, or Latino Fox News has reported that out of the pool of 400,000 in one year 1.6% of these persons detained by ICE were U.S. citizens.  This is more than the Bush Administration deported (even with errors) in 4 years.  In fact, DHS Secretary Napolitano boasted that the program was doing its share and was helping to keep American safe.    What the DOJ and the Obama Administration failed to voice was that at least 1.6% of those arrested were U.S. citizens.  In a further law recently signed by the President, these U.S. Citizens can now be detained indefinitely under the  National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  Further studies by AILA, American Immigration Lawyers Association, report that deportations are closer to 1 million in two years.   That amount is close to the total population of San Antonio, which is at 1.33 Million.   Imagine, an entire city gone, by “legal means.”   What is more alarming is that while there is an alleged 11 million undocumented in the U.S.,  only 77% are Latino/Hispanic.  Those detained and arrested under Secured Communities were 93% Latino.  There is a disproportion in usage of this program.  In other words, this Administration is targeting Latinos.

Rather than report on this truth, the media  and their articles concentrate only on Republican rhetoric.  While words are powerful, do we, as Latinos and Americans, not feel in danger when Latino U.S. Citizens are randomly selected, harassed and incarcerated by this Administration as law breakers?  When the Attorney General and the President use their power, over Congress, to increase deportations they are not deporting Europeans, Asians, or other immigrants.  They are deporting Latinos.  So while the rhetoric in the GOP may be against illegal immigrants, this current Administration is effectively doing the cleansing of America by deporting Latinos, illegal and U.S. Citizens.

Additionally, when the “fast and furious” debacle came to light regarding the issuance of guns to Mexican Cartels, who were they aiming at?  Those who live along the border and are mainly Mexican, including U.S. Citizens.  Once again, the rhetoric of the GOP pales in comparison to what is being done against Latinos in this Administration.  The idea that the Attorney General would allow such a violent act against a group of people and believe that the guns would not be traced back to the Administration is negligent and contentious.  Latinos cannot begin to believe that a President and a “friend” to Latinos would commit such atrocities, but he has.  In using the laws and his Administration, this President has endangered families and Latinos who continue to view him as the leader of the free world.  What is even more deplorable is that Latino Democrats have not stood up to state that these actions are wrong and need to be remedied regardless of party loyalty.  These acts are wrong against Americans, Latinos, families, and the United States and all of its freedoms.    In fact, this Administration has failed the Latino Community because it lacks the interest and the understanding of what values are embodied within the community.

When Candidates like Newt Gingrich address the actual facts about food stamps stating that Americans have increased as recipients of this entitlement under the Obama Administration, Democrats cite this as racist. But they fail to address the fact that the largest number, of the population, who is receiving food stamps are white Americans not blacks. So why are they playing the race card?  If we ask what Latinos hope to gain under the Obama Administration, let’s look over the last three years, deportations, guns to cartels, cuts in education availability, and separation of families.

When those who attack the GOP as being anti-Latino because of rhetoric that looks to deport illegal immigrants, let us be clear about who is acting on these words.  Unlike that famous speech that then Sen. Barrack Obama delivered at the DNC in which he said, we are not a black American or white America, we are the United States of American.  He forgot to mention the Brown part of America, Latinos.

President Obama’s “new” found voice by way of his Executive Power, is a 180 degree change from a speech where he stated that as President, he had to enforce the laws on the books and that he could do nothing else to help the plight of the undocumented youth in the U.S., whose Latino population exists in the hundreds of thousands.  This power that he previously said that he didn’t have, is now conveniently discovered by way of the Napolitano Memo, five months before the November election and is expected to “temporarily” offer a band-aid fix, to a problem that has this country in a state of limbo.

The Napolitano Memo also comes after Obama received  a  letter about two weeks ago signed by nearly 100 law professors, who offered a strategy to President Obama outlining his authority to provide temporary relief from deportation. The announcement also comes on the thirtieth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Plyler v. Doe, which held that states cannot exclude undocumented children from elementary and secondary schools.

Deferred action exists under, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), §103(a), USC 8 §1103 and states that

“The Attorney General shall be charged with the administration and enforcement of this Act and all other laws relating to the immigration and naturalization of aliens, except insofar as this Act or such laws relate to the powers, functions, and duties conferred upon the President, the Secretary of State, the officers of the Department of State, or diplomatic or consular officers: Provided, however, That determination and ruling by the Attorney General with respect to all questions of law shall be controlling.”

By way of the Executive Power, the Supreme Court has ruled that the President will grant power to its administrative agencies so as to enforce certain laws. Additionally, depending on the timing, the deferred action can prevent someone from being placed in removal proceedings, suspend a current deportation order, or stay an existing deportation order.  What the Memo Directive does not provide, is a way to change or adjust status under deferred action.

In using his executive power, Obama is not circumventing the law, but he is conveniently using it, by way of the Attorney General and the Department of Homeland Security at a time when he seeks to desperately keep Latinos on his side with “nuggets” of empty promises.  Previously, Obama never pushed for immigration reform in 2008 or thereafter.  He taunted the hopeful by stating that he would pass the Dream Act if placed on his desk, but never lifted a finger to fight for it.

The Napolitano Memo is also at the heels of criticism for the Morton Memo, put in place one year to date, which was supposed to use Prosecutorial Discretion to prevent low priority cases from being placed in deportation proceedings.  This was supposed to have included the young immigrants without a criminal record and who were currently in school.   But the Morton Memo failed to give any type of relief as ongoing review of pending removal cases yielded disappointing results and cases continued to surface, of immigrants being denied prosecutorial discretion despite compelling circumstances.

When Senator Rubio introduced the idea of a new “Dream Act” version, which by the way is very similar to what this “memo” of deferred action seems to say, the President did not applaud the Senator for attempting to help the youth.  He instead, laughed during an interview and stated that he (the President) would work on immigration in the next five years.  And so, for the next few years, Latinos can expect “nuggets” of promises to be thrown our way.

This outreach is temporary and is a promise to the Latino community that the youth will be out of harm’s way, for the moment.  This Memo is slight power that now is distributed to agencies by way of  the Attorney General, and is applied in a discretionary fashion.  For now it is temporary and fails to address what will happen to the young adults in a few years after they age-out or cannot travel, or adjust their status.  For now, everyone is on board, but the after affects when felt, will stir us to ask why didn’t we fight for more?

Senator Rubio’s version was more plausible because it sought to go through the proper channels to have the Dream Act become Congressional Law.  The law would have allowed the youth to become educated and then follow through to a non-immigrant visa that would have placed them in line for receiving their Legal Permanent Residency.  It would have created a set of educated, high tax payers, who could have become part of our society and eventually become U.S. Citizens by competing for it.

The Napolitano Memo is Administrative and non-binding meaning that it can be rescinded at any time, and these Latino youth would be in the same limbo as before.  Moreover, the Memo gives approximately 800,000 to 1.5 million the opportunity to apply for the deferred action if they have the following:

1. immigrants may apply for a two-year renewable grant of “deferred action” if they entered the United States before age 16;
2. are younger than 30;
3. have lived continuously in the United States for at least five years;
4. have not been convicted of a felony or significant misdemeanor; and are currently in school, have graduated from high school or earned a GED, or served in the military.

First, the Memo states that all laws are to be enforced and those with the initial power to decide whether to implement the Memo for those outside the court system are CBP, USCIS, and DHS.  These agencies who first encounter the youth shall have the power to use discretion as to whether the youth should be placed in removal proceedings.

Second, if the youth are currently in removal proceedings, the standard will be applied in a discretionary manner on a case by case basis, by whom is not clear.  Using the criteria stated above, those making the decision will decide the fate of these youth.  The many who did not finish school or were not enlisted in the military are not eligible for this temporary relief.   Moreover, it is unclear whether those  about to be 31 years will be in unlawful status as this deferred action does apply to them.

Finally, those who are not currently in proceedings will be eligible to apply for the deferred action through USCIS.  The agency will  use the criteria stated above, and use discretionary authority to decide the status of the youth.  It is not for certain if the applicants will be approved or not, but it is a careful choice that the many will have to make.

If we listen to what Obama is saying, he speaks loud and clear in that he states, that this is not amnesty, it is not a benefit, and will not give the youth a path to citizenship.  What it gives us is a promise that will not be a congressional “law” and may not be enforced if we use the Morton Memo as an example.  He is trying to win favor by now coming forward to use powers that he had all along and has given us the Napolitano Memo that is limited.  In other words, he is promising to right a wrong that he should have legally done a long time ago, again.  Latinos should remind him that we are conservative when it comes to family, and will protect our children and their dreams this time around.

Linda Vega is an Immigration Attorney and  Founder of Latinos Ready To Vote

As we said in April, the Obama administration did a particularly poor job of arguing the case before SCOTUS, leaving out racial profiling, the most powerful argument against state and local police enforcement of immigration law.  During oral arguments, Chief Justice Roberts even opened the door with the question “No part of your argument has to do with racial or ethnic profiling?” and yet Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. still declined to raise the issue.

There can be little doubt that involving police in immigration enforcement results in racial profiling. Numerous studies nationwide prove statistically that racial profiling is a problem even without immigration enforcement, with blacks and Hispanics typically 1.5 to 3 times MORE likely to be stopped by police for traffic infractions, substantially MORE likely to have their vehicle searched, and substantially LESS likely to be found with contraband. A 2008 poll by Pew Research found 9% of adult Latinos reported they had been stopped by law enforcement and asked legal status during the previous 12 months. Not surprisingly, 81% of Hispanics do not want police involved in immigration enforcement. A recent study found that Latinos represent 93% of those arrested under secure communities program are Latino, versus 77% of the undocumented population, and nearly 50% of those arrested under secure communities are NOT arrested for criminal offenses but rather traffic infractions, which suggests strongly that Latinos are being arrested rather than cited so they can be funneled through secure communities at jails.

The best example of the impact of immigration enforcement can be found in Maricopa County, which placed great emphasis on immigration enforcement, even at the expense of its core public safety mission. The U.S. Department of Justice invested considerable resources into investigating widespread complaints of racial profiling by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, headed by Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and based on Arpaio’s own records concluded that Latinos are 4-9 times as likely to be stopped by police for traffic violations, and 20% of the stops of Latinos lacked probable cause for the stop. The 287(g) program, which authorizes designated state and local police officers to enforce immigration law, also has been the subject of widespread complaints about racial profiling, the failure to follow priorities, etc., as reported by ICE’s own Inspector General. Amazingly Obama’s solicitor general never raised racial profiling with the Supreme Court in this case!

We predict eventually the “papers please” provision will be struck down in its entirety due to racial profiling that will likely result, and clear contradiction with federal law. Section 287(g) of the INA provides for police immigration enforcement through agreements with ICE, requiring supervision by ICE, 4-5 weeks of training, background checks, etc. SB1070 prohibits racial profiling but then fails to provide any remedy if that section is violated, while providing that anyone can sue police if they are not enforcing SB1070.

SB1070 and similar laws clearly contradict 287(g) by not providing any federal oversight over immigration enforcement, no training requirement, and no accountability except through costly litigation. Indeed, when SB1070 became law, Arizona’s training plan consisted of having police officers watch a 90 minute video, versus 4-5 weeks of intensive training. Immigration law is very complex, and without a basic understanding of immigration law it is very easy to make mistakes and arrest law abiding citizens or legal immigrants. Thousands of U.S. citizens are mistakenly arrested as undocumented immigrants every year just from Secure Communities alone, according to a recent study.

In our opinion, Obama wanted the centerpiece police enforcement provision left intact as a powerful wedge issue, which explains the failure to raise the most powerful argument in this case. SB1070 is extremely unpopular among Latinos, who are already experiencing racial profiling. In losing on this “papers please provision” Obama wins politically, at the expense of Latinos and others who are often perceived as immigrants.

Mitt Romney made some excellent points in his statement today, though we disagree about states fashioning their own immigration enforcement solutions:

 Today’s decision underscores the need for a President who will lead on this critical issue and work in a bipartisan fashion to pursue a national immigration strategy. President Obama has failed to provide any leadership on immigration. This represents yet another broken promise by this President.

Obama’s recent actions are stop gaps intended more to shore up flagging support among Latinos than long term fixes to our broken immigration system.

#####

About Us – Cafe Con Leche Republicans is a national organization of Republicans who welcome “New Americans”, defined as immigrants and family of recent immigrants. Our mission is to make America and the GOP, more welcoming to “New Immigrants” through political activism, “in-reach” and education within the Republican Party, and lobbying government to adopt more immigrant friendly policies. We also seek to bring more conservative and moderate “New Americans” to the Republican Party. These efforts will strengthen the GOP, and lead more Republicans to embrace welcoming policies for immigrants and their families. We have chapters in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Nevada, and California. Our members and leadership are predominantly Hispanic, though we define ourselves by mission and guiding principles, not ethnicity, and we welcome all who share our goals. Our leadership is 100% Republican.