DOCSLIB.ORG

Panel Discussion and Commentary: What to Expect with Immigration Reform in the 110Th Congress and the Implications for the Legal Community Alan L

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Panel Discussion and Commentary: What to Expect with Immigration Reform in the 110Th Congress and the Implications for the Legal Community Alan L Campbell Law Review Volume 29 Article 5 Issue 2 Winter 2007 January 2007 Panel Discussion and Commentary: What to Expect with Immigration Reform in the 110th Congress and the Implications for the Legal Community Alan L. Button Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.campbell.edu/clr Part of the Immigration Law Commons Recommended Citation Alan L. Button, Panel Discussion and Commentary: What to Expect with Immigration Reform in the 110th Congress and the Implications for the Legal Community, 29 Campbell L. Rev. 263 (2007). This Commentary is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Repository @ Campbell University School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Campbell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Repository @ Campbell University School of Law. Button: Panel Discussion and Commentary: What to Expect with Immigration Panel Discussion and Commentary: What to Expect with Immigration Reform in the 110th Congress and the Implications for the Legal Community ALAN L. BUTTON* IMMIGRATION: POLICY WITHOUT BOUNDARIES AMERICA AND CULTURE Politicians like to talk about "law and order," "family values," and "jobs." These subjects are discussed because they are matters of con- cern to the electorate. But because they are matters of concern to the general public, they get talked about in many settings, not just by vote- seekers, but by disc jockeys, poultry farmers, and lawyers as well. The particular contexts for such discussions are many-and they are many because issues of security, family, and business are issues of culture. They are issues that go to who we are as a society. They go to what it means to live in America. It is no surprise, therefore, that such matters are raised not only in debates about war, taxes, the judicial system, the environment, or the role of the media, but also in debates about immi- gration. Jeanne Butterfield and Mark Krikorian focused on these and other matters in their discussion on February 16, 2007, at the Cardinal Club in Raleigh, North Carolina. Culture is a function of many variables, including language, relig- ion, history, the arts, geography, and law. And in a democracy, where the people govern and where they are permitted to associate with others of like mind and experience, the culture is inevitably affected by changing demographics. The question that needs to be answered before responsible immigration policy can be implemented is: "What would we have America be?" There is a tendency for parties to a debate on immigration to ignore, minimize, or otherwise avoid the question. To be fair, limita- * Professor Button served as litigation counsel for Bausch & Lomb and as a judicial clerk for the Honorable Donald S. Russell, United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, before joining the law faculty in 1989. He is a graduate of Cornell University, earned his J.D. from Washington and Lee School of Law, holds an LL.M. from the University of Cambridge, England, and is a Fulbright Scholar who taught in Slovenia in 1998. Professor Button served as moderator for this panel discussion at the symposium. Published by Scholarly Repository @ Campbell University School of Law, 2007 1 Campbell Law Review, Vol. 29, Iss. 2 [2007], Art. 5 CAMPBELL LAW REVIEW [Vol. 29:263 tions imposed by time impel most every debate on virtually every sub- ject to proceed at least in part on unarticulated assumptions. In an ideal world, those assumptions would be identified and parties in dia- logue seeking to resolve a problem would seek common ground as a point of beginning-wherever that might be. That the Butterfields and Krikorians of the nation could find a common starting point, however, is by no means a given. Still, it would be a step in the right direction at least to agree on the question: "What would you have America be?" or, as North Carolina State Senator Phil Berger put it earlier, "What does it mean to be an American?"' In the immigration context, to answer the question, perhaps com- mon ground would lie in something like "one Nation under God, indi- visible, with liberty and justice for all."2 More elaborately, the Constitution provides that "the People of the United States" have come together "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."3 In what has become for some the equivalent of scrip- ture, the Declaration of Independence asserts that certain truths are self-evident. 4 The Gettysburg Address affirms that we are a self-gov- erning people-Lincoln urging resolve in honor of the dead "that gov- ernment of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."' 5 Even the USA PATRIOT Act implies that there is an America that is separate from and greater than its individual citizens and unique among nations-the "USA" in the title is derived from the phrase "Uniting and Strengthening America. "6' 1. Phil Berger, N.C. State Senator, North Carolina Policy Panel: The Future of Immigration Law and Related Issues in the N.C. General Assembly and the Consequences for North Carolina Lawyers at the Campbell Law Review Symposium: Immigration Law: A Practical Guide for North Carolina Practitioners (Feb. 16, 2007). Representatives from both sides of the political aisle during this panel discussion asserted that the "survival of the nation" may be at stake in the debate on immigration. 2. 4 U.S.C. § 4 (2000) (pledge of allegiance); see also 36 U.S.C. § 302 (2000) ("'In God we trust' is the national motto."). 3. U.S. CONST., pmbl. 4. THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE paras. 1-2 (U.S. 1776) (invoking "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" and appealing to "the Supreme Judge of the World," the colonists declared: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."). 5. Abraham Lincoln, U.S. President, Gettysburg Address (Nov. 19, 1863). 6. Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act), Pub. L. No. 107- 56, 115 Stat. 272 (codified in scattered sections of the United States Code) (2001). http://scholarship.law.campbell.edu/clr/vol29/iss2/5 2 Button: Panel Discussion and Commentary: What to Expect with Immigration 20071 PANEL DISCUSSION AND COMMENTARY These are uniquely American elements. In the hearts of genera- tions of Americans and in the minds of people around the world, this holy American writ is by implication incorporated by reference in the words of Emma Lazarus, preserved on a plaque in the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty, the "Mother of Exiles." She bids "world-wide wel- come," crying, "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore; Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"7 But immigration necessarily anticipates future possibilities-and compassion can be misplaced or ill-conceived.' It is one thing to define the American culture as it is or has been. It is an entirely differ- ent matter, looking forward, to advocate-and then to legislate-either its protection or its modification. AVOIDING THE QUESTION? Whether Butterfield and Krikorian agree on a standard for identi- fying and defining "the problem" is not exactly clear. Regardless, it seems apparent that their visions of the America of the future do not coincide. Butterfield explains that her "starting point is that the immigra- tion system is broken." She goes on: "[T]hen the question is what is it going to take to fix this broken system? And I think that's where our paths ...will quite markedly diverge." Among other things, she observes that there are "twelve million undocumented people" in the United States. But is the system "bro- ken" because "twelve million" is too many-or too few? Is it because they are "undocumented" rather than documented? Are they "undocu- mented" or "illegal"? Are these millions just "people," or are they "immigrants" or "aliens" or "criminals"? Krikorian, with a nod in the direction of the politics of word choice, when asked what "the problem" is, responds in part as follows: "[O]bviously, illegal immigration is a problem because it's illegal." He makes pretty clear that part of his "problem" with the "twelve million" is the adjective "undocumented." For him, they are more accurately 7. Emma Lazarus, The New Colossus (1883), available at http://www.nps.gov/stli/ historyculture/upload/new%20colossus%20for%20displaypage2.pdf. 8. No reasonable person would argue that the United States can absorb all those who would like to enter, or even a substantial percentage of that number. Perhaps, therefore, the potential for our nation's greatest service to the rest of the world lies in its capacity and willingness to demonstrate - to model - how a society might be free and prosper at the same time. Published by Scholarly Repository @ Campbell University School of Law, 2007 3 Campbell Law Review, Vol. 29, Iss. 2 [2007], Art. 5 266 CAMPBELL LAW REVIEW [Vol. 29:263 described as "illegal." But he explains further that "the more impor- tant problem" is "mass immigration," legal or not, something he says is "fundamentally incompatible with the goals and characteristics of a modern society." Butterfield disagrees: "[I]t's . immigration that has fueled this great nation and brought not only hard work but also vision, entrepre- neurship, [and] talent [that] have made this country the dynamic and vibrant society that it is.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Teaching Immigration with the Immigrant Stories Project LESSON PLANS
    Teaching Immigration with the Immigrant Stories Project LESSON PLANS 1 Acknowledgments The Immigration History Research Center and The Advocates for Human Rights would like to thank the many people who contributed to these lesson plans. Lead Editor: Madeline Lohman Contributors: Elizabeth Venditto, Erika Lee, and Saengmany Ratsabout Design: Emily Farell and Brittany Lynk Volunteers and Interns: Biftu Bussa, Halimat Alawode, Hannah Mangen, Josefina Abdullah, Kristi Herman Hill, and Meredith Rambo. Archival Assistance and Photo Permissions: Daniel Necas A special thank you to the Immigration History Research Center Archives for permitting the reproduction of several archival photos. The lessons would not have been possible without the generous support of a Joan Aldous Diversity Grant from the University of Minnesota’s College of Liberal Arts. Immigrant Stories is a project of the Immigration History Research Center at the University of Minnesota. This work has been made possible through generous funding from the Digital Public Library of America Digital Hubs Pilot Project, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. About the Immigration History Research Center Founded in 1965, the University of Minnesota's Immigration History Research Center (IHRC) aims to transform how we understand immigration in the past and present. Along with its partner, the IHRC Archives, it is North America's oldest and largest interdisciplinary research center and archives devoted to preserving and understanding immigrant and refugee life. The IHRC promotes interdisciplinary research on migration, race, and ethnicity in the United States and the world. It connects U.S. immigration history research to contemporary immigrant and refugee communities through its Immigrant Stories project.
    [Show full text]
  • Carolina Journal
    • Magnet Schools • Community Colleges Attract Controversy C A R O L I N A On President’s Agenda Durham Impact Fee ‘Winning the Future’ Volume 14, Number 3 A Monthly Journal of News, March 2005 Analysis, and Opinion from JOURNAL the John Locke Foundation www.CarolinaJournal.com www.JohnLocke.org Smokestacks Bill Saved Duke From EPA, Audit of some of their coal-fired power plants. Rate freeze protected EPA also filed an administrative order against the federally owned Tennessee Val- utility from lawsuit, ley Authority for its violations. penalties, and fines Ensuing months and years saw some of the utilities enter settlement agreements with EPA and the USDOJ. The first to reach By PAUL CHESSER an agreement was Tampa Electric Com- Associate Editor pany, which was forced to spend $1 billion RALEIGH to install stronger emissions controls on its ontrary to the stated objectives of coal-fired power plants. The company also its supporters, the 2002 North Caro- agreed to pay a $3.5 million civil penalty C lina Clean Smokestacks law — and to spend $10 million to $11 million on based on controversial environmental as- mitigation projects for its emissions. sumptions used to espouse questionable Other companies later reached costly health benefits — may have been crafted to settlements with the EPA. In April 2003 help protect the state’s two largest electric- Virginia Electric and Power Company ity suppliers from federal lawsuits and fines. agreed to spend $1.2 billion on emissions The plan, signed into law June 2002, controls and to pay a $5.3 million civil pen- was developed by the liberal group Envi- alty and at least $13.9 million on mitigation ronmental Defense, which had joined the projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Lorem Ipsum Main Title Statement
    MEDIA-2008/09/25 1 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION DEMOCRACY IN THE AGE OF NEW MEDIA: A REPORT ON THE MEDIA AND THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE Washington, D.C. Thursday, September 25, 2008 ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 MEDIA-2008/09/25 2 PARTICIPANTS: Introduction DARRELL WEST Vice President and Director of Governance Studies, The Brookings Institution Featured Speakers BANU AKDENIZLI Index Methodologist, Project for Excellence in Journalism MARTIN KAPLAN Director, Norman Lear Center, USC Annenberg E.J. DIONNE JR. Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution ROBERTO SURO Professor, USC Annenberg Moderator MARVIN KALB Edward R. Murrow Professor Emeritus, Harvard University Panelists T. ALEXANDER ALEINIKOFF Dean, Georgetown University Law Center STEVEN LIVINGSTON Professor of Media & Public Affairs, George Washington University JAMES CARAFANO Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 MEDIA-2008/09/25 3 TAMARA JACOBY President, ImmigrationWorks USA DORIS MEISSNER Senior Fellow, Migration Policy Institute ANGELA KELLEY Director, Immigration Policy Center AUDREY SINGER Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution MARK KRIKORIAN Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies PETER SKERRY Nonresident Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution * * * * * ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 MEDIA-2008/09/25 4 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. WEST: Okay, why don’t we get started. I’m Darrell West; I’m Vice President and Director of Governance Studies at The Brookings Institution.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:18-Cv-05025 Document 1 Filed 06/06/18 Page 1 of 68
    Case 1:18-cv-05025 Document 1 Filed 06/06/18 Page 1 of 68 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK NEW YORK IMMIGRATION COALITION, CASA DE MARYLAND, AMERICAN-ARAB ANTI- DISCRIMINATION COMMITTEE, Civil Action No. ADC RESEARCH INSTITUTE, and MAKE THE ROAD NEW YORK, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; and WILBUR L. ROSS, JR., in his official capacity as Secretary of Commerce, and BUREAU OF THE CENSUS, an agency within the United States Department of Commerce; and RON S. JARMIN, in his capacity as performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Director of the U.S. Census Bureau, Defendants. COMPLAINT 1. On March 26, 2018, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross ordered that the 2020 Decennial Census include a question about the citizenship of all U.S. residents for the first time since 1950. The Secretary provided no legitimate reason for this decision, let alone any justification for taking such action without any of the customary and essential preparatory testing for adding questions to the Decennial Census. There is no legitimate explanation. Rather, the addition of the citizenship question is a naked act of intentional discrimination directed at immigrant communities of color that is intended to punish their presence, avoid their recognition, stunt their growing political power, and deprive them and the communities in which they live of economic benefits. Case 1:18-cv-05025 Document 1 Filed 06/06/18 Page 2 of 68 2. As Secretary Ross recently testified, adding a citizenship question will lead to a “decline” in participation in the Decennial Census—which Ross estimated at 1 percent of the population (or more than 3 million people)—because there are “folks who may not feel comfortable answering” the citizenship question.
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas S. Massey Curriculum Vitae December 3, 2020
    Douglas S. Massey Curriculum Vitae December 3, 2020 Address: Office of Population Research Princeton University Wallace Hall Princeton, NJ 08544 [email protected] Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0109-522X Birth: Born October 5, 1952 in Olympia, Washington, USA Citizenship: Citizen and Resident of the United States Education: Ph.D., Sociology, Princeton University, 1978 M.A., Sociology, Princeton University, 1977 B.A., Magna Cum Laude in Sociology-Anthropology, Psychology, and Spanish, Western Washington University, 1974 Honorary Master in Arts and Sciences, Honoris Causa, University Pennsylvania, 1985. Degrees: Doctor of Social Science Honoris Causa, Ohio State University, 2012 Languages: Fluent in Spanish Employment: (9/05-present) Henry G. Bryant Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs, Princeton University (7/03- 8/05) Professor of Sociology and Public Policy, Princeton University (7/94-6/03) Dorothy Swaine Thomas Professor, Department of Sociology, Graduate Group in Demography, and Lauder Program in International Studies, University of Pennsylvania (7/90-6/94) Professor, Irving B. Harris School of Public Policy Studies, University of Chicago (7/87-6/94) Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Chicago (7/85-7/87) Associate Professor, Department of Sociology and Graduate Group in Demography, University of Pennsylvania (9/80-7/85) Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology and Graduate Group in Demography, University of Pennsylvania (9/79-9/80) NSF Postdoctoral Fellow, Graduate Group in Demography, University of California at Berkeley (1/79-6/79) Lecturer, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University (9/78-9/79) Research Associate, Office of Population Research, Princeton University Major Fields: Demography, Urban Sociology, Stratification, Social Research Methods, Latin American Studies, Race/Ethnic Relations, Biosociology, Immigration Honors and Named Phi Beta Kappa Visiting Scholar, 2020-2021 Awards: Academia Europaea, elected member 2018-present Bronislaw Malinowski Award 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Discourse of Amnesty in Immigration Policy
    Akron Law Review Volume 41 Issue 1 Article 5 2008 The Political Discourse of Amnesty in Immigration Policy Bryn Siegel Follow this and additional works at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview Part of the Immigration Law Commons Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Recommended Citation Siegel, Bryn (2008) "The Political Discourse of Amnesty in Immigration Policy," Akron Law Review: Vol. 41 : Iss. 1 , Article 5. Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol41/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The University of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Law Review by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Siegel: Amnesty in Immigration Policy SIEGEL_FINAL 3/23/2009 2:25 PM THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE OF AMNESTY IN IMMIGRATION POLICY [S]hall we refuse to the unhappy fugitives from distress that hospitality which the savages of the wilderness extended to our fathers arriving in this land? Shall oppressed humanity find no asylum on this globe?1 I. INTRODUCTION Eduardo Sandoval has lived in the United States without legal status for nearly twenty years.2 He now has a wife and three children who are all U.S. citizens.3 As the husband of a U.S. citizen, Eduardo would otherwise qualify to adjust his status to that of a legal permanent resident,4 if not for the fact that he entered without inspection when he 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Amicus Curiae Brief (00708758-4)
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL _______________________________ Matter of A-B-, Respondent _______________________________ Referred from: United States Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals A______________ _______________________________ BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE INNOVATION LAW LAB _______________________________ Nadia H. Dahab, OSB No. 125630 Stoll Stoll Berne Lokting & Shlachter P.C. 209 SW Oak Street, Suite 500 Portland, OR 97204 (503) 227-1600 [email protected] Stephen W. Manning, OSB No. 013373 Innovation Law Lab P.O. Box 40103 Portland, OR 97204 (503) 241-0035 [email protected] Counsel for Amicus Curiae Innovation Law Lab TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE ............................................................................ 4 ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................. 5 I. The INA requires the Attorney General to fairly and impartially administer the immigration laws. ...................................................................................... 5 II. The Constitution guarantees noncitizens an impartial decision maker in immigration proceedings. ...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • From Bigotry to Ban: the Ideological Origins and Devastating Harms of the Muslim and African Bans
    Garrity & Crnkovich Book Proof (Do Not Delete) 6/30/20 7:10 PM FROM BIGOTRY TO BAN: THE IDEOLOGICAL ORIGINS AND DEVASTATING HARMS OF THE MUSLIM AND AFRICAN BANS KRISTIN GARRITY AND EMILY CRNKOVICH ABSTRACT In this paper we examine some of the recent history of the anti- immigration and anti-Muslim movements—looking to the Muslim and African Ban in particular—and how their rhetoric and ideology have directly influenced the policies of the Trump administration. We also discuss the irony of these policies in light of the Trump administration’s push for international religious freedom. Finally, we examine publicly available stories about the Muslim and African Ban and those directly impacted who are experiencing family separation and financial hardship. In addition to demonstrating the devastating harms and consequences of the Muslim and African Ban, we also show that this policy is not a product of the Trump administration alone. It is the culmination of decades of research and activism by white nationalist, anti-immigration, and anti-Muslim think tanks, organizations, and activists. In light of the fact that in November 2019 the administration slashed the number of refugees admitted for resettlement in the U.S. and further expanded the Muslim and African Ban in February 2020, we feel that any conversations about this policy that does not take into account its history and context is woefully incomplete. I. INTRODUCTION The first version of the Muslim and African Ban, known previously as the Muslim Ban, was enacted on January 27, 2017,1 banning individuals from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.2 Between then and the June 2018 Supreme Court decision that upheld the policy,3 the Ban 1 See generally Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States, Exec.
    [Show full text]
  • Mainstreaming Hate: the Anti-Immigrant Movement in the U.S
    NOV A report from the Center on Extremism 2018 Mainstreaming Hate: The Anti-Immigrant Movement in the U.S. Our Mission: To stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all. ABOUT THE CENTER ON EXTREMISM The ADL Center on Extremism (COE) is one of the world’s foremost authorities on extremism, terrorism, anti-Semitism and all forms of hate. For decades, COE’s staff of seasoned investigators, analysts and researchers have tracked extremist activity and hate in the U.S. and abroad — online and on the ground. The staff, which represent a combined total of substantially more than 100 years of experience in this arena, routinely assist law enforcement with extremist-related investigations, provide tech companies with critical data and expertise and respond to wide-ranging media requests. As ADL’s research and investigative arm, COE is a clearinghouse of real-time information about extremism and hate of all types. COE staff regularly serve as expert witnesses, provide congressional testimony and speak to national and international conference audiences about the threats posed by extremism and anti-Semitism. You can find the full complement of COE’s research and publications at ADL.org. ADL is a leading anti-hate organization that was founded in 1913 in response to an escalating climate of anti-Semitism and bigotry. Today, ADL is still the first call when acts of anti-Semitism occur and continues to fight all forms of hate. A global leader in exposing extremism, delivering anti-bias education and fighting hate online, ADL’s ultimate goal is a world in which no group or individual suffers from bias, discrimination or hate.
    [Show full text]
  • Module 17: the Muslim and African Ban (2017)
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Domestic Policy Teaching Beyond September 11th 9-2021 Module 17: The Muslim and African Ban (2017) Nena Beecham Georgetown University Kris Garrity Georgetown University Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/teachingbeyondsept11-domestic-policy Part of the American Politics Commons, International Relations Commons, Secondary Education Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation (OVERRIDE) Teaching Beyond September 11th (2021). Module 17. The Muslim and African Ban. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. https://doi.org/10.48659/svsy-e437 This module is part of the Teaching Beyond September 11th project. View other modules or visit the project website. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/teachingbeyondsept11-domestic-policy/1 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Module 17: The Muslim and African Ban (2017) Keywords US History, Global History, Social Studies, Government & Politics, International Relations, September 11, US Domestic Policy Disciplines American Politics | International Relations | Secondary Education | United States History Publisher University of Pennsylvania Comments This module is part of the Teaching Beyond September 11th project. View other modules or visit the project website. This book is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/teachingbeyondsept11-domestic-policy/1 Teaching Beyond September 11th Module 17: The Muslim and African
    [Show full text]
  • How Would Millions of Guest Workers Impact Working Americans and Ameri- Cans Seeking Employment?
    HOW WOULD MILLIONS OF GUEST WORKERS IMPACT WORKING AMERICANS AND AMERI- CANS SEEKING EMPLOYMENT? HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY, AND CLAIMS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION MARCH 24, 2004 Serial No. 78 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/judiciary U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 92–672 PDF WASHINGTON : 2004 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 16:57 Jun 15, 2004 Jkt 089266 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 G:\WORK\IMMIG\032404\92672.000 HJUD1 PsN: 92672 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., Wisconsin, Chairman HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina HOWARD L. BERMAN, California LAMAR SMITH, Texas RICK BOUCHER, Virginia ELTON GALLEGLY, California JERROLD NADLER, New York BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina WILLIAM L. JENKINS, Tennessee ZOE LOFGREN, California CHRIS CANNON, Utah SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama MAXINE WATERS, California JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts MARK GREEN, Wisconsin WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts RIC KELLER, Florida ROBERT WEXLER, Florida MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JEFF FLAKE, Arizona ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York MIKE PENCE, Indiana ADAM B. SCHIFF, California J.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Hate Crimes and Discrimination Against Arab Americans: the Post - September 11 Backlash September 11,2001 - October 11,2002
    Report on Hate Crimes and Discrimination Against Arab Americans: The Post - September 11 Backlash September 11,2001 - October 11,2002 Hussein Ibish Editor Anne Stewart Principal Researcher Legal section - Hussein Ibish, Carol Khawly, and Kareem Shora Education Section - Marvin Wingfield Media bias and defamation section - Hussein Ibish Acts of Support Section - Anne Stewart and Hussein Ibish Assistant Editors: Laila Al-Qatami, Margot Andrews, Jeanine Shama Publications Director - Laila Al-Qatami Cover Design - Echo Design Layout - Object Design & Communications Printing - International Graphics American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee 4201 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20008 Tel: (202) 244-2990 Fax: (202) 244-3196 E-mail: [email protected] www.adc.org Safa Rifka, M.D. Chairman Ziad J. Asali, M.D. President This Report would not have been possible without the support of: Open Society Institute Unitarian Universalist Service Committee and Tides Foundation Shefa Fund Copyright©2003 ADCRI This report is dedicated to Dr. Hala Salaam Maksoud (1943-2002) Our friend, leader and mentor EXECUTIVEEXECUTIVE SUMMARYSUMMARY In this Report, the American-Arab Anti-Dis- passengers from aircraft after boarding, but before take- crimination Commitee Research Institute off, based on the passenger’s perceived ethnicity. (ADCRI) surveys the experiences of the I Over 800 cases of employment discrimination against Arab-American community in the year Arab Americans, approximately a four-fold increase over following the September 11, 2001, terrorist previous annual rates. attacks. I Numerous instances of denial of service, discrimina- tory service and housing discrimination. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS New discriminatory immigration policies Hate crimes and discrimination I Secret detentions, hearings and deportations.
    [Show full text]