The severity of child labor in the United States and around the world

 

The Department of Labor (DOL) recently issued its yearly Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor report, examining 131 countries’ efforts to abolish child labor in 2022 and the obstacles those efforts face. The report highlights, in part, the vulnerability of migrant children in the United States working for little pay in industries that are especially unsafe for children and notes an alarming 69% increase in unlawful work by children since 2018.

The International Labour Organization (ILO), a United Nations Agency, defines child labor as “work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to physical and mental development.” The “worst forms of child labor” are those that harm children’s well-being and/or expose them to danger. This includes slavery, sexual exploitation, the use of children in armed combat, and exposure to dangerous machinery or toxic chemicals.

More information: https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5881-child-labor-in-the-United-States-and-around-the-world.html

Ending Birthright Citizenship Could Put All Americans’ Nationality in Jeopardy

Written by Aaron Reichlin-Melnick

On Monday night, President Trump told reporters that he intended to end birthright citizenship and claimed that he could do so with an executive order. 

Birthright citizenship comes from the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which states that “Any person born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, is a citizen of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Although the president falsely claimed that no other country provides birthright citizenship, it is the law in over 30 countries, including Mexico and Canada. 

The unexpected announcement sparked fears for many in the immigrant community, including U.S. citizens whose parents are undocumented. It met swift condemnation from all sides of the aisle, with Republicans and Democrats alike questioning the legality. Legal scholars agreed that the plan is unconstitutional; a president cannot amend the Constitution through executive action. 

In 1898, in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship. Wong, born in San Francisco, had been prevented from re-entering the United States by immigration agents who argued that he was not a citizen because his parents were Chinese. The Supreme Court ruled in his favor, declaring that “citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution.” In other words, as long as you are born in the United States, you are a citizen. 

Despite this 100-year-old ruling, some continue to argue that the constitutionality of birthright citizenship is not settled. In a tweet on Wednesday morning, President Trump endorsed a fringe legal theory that the children of undocumented immigrants are not citizens because their parents were not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, as required by the Fourteenth Amendment. 

However, “[t]o be ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the U.S. is simply to be subject to the authority of the U.S. government … [and to be] required to obey U.S. laws,” according to James C. Ho, a judge nominated to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals by President Trump and confirmed in January. 

The Supreme Court has largely agreed, suggesting in the 1982 case Plyer v. Doe that there is “no plausible” interpretation of the phrase that excludes undocumented immigrants. 

The only people not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States are diplomats and ambassadors, who are entitled to diplomatic immunity and are not required to follow most American laws. 

The only way for the president to end birthright citizenship would be to amend the Constitution, which requires a two-thirds majority vote of the House and the Senate, and then for three-fourths states to approve the Amendment. 

Eliminating birthright citizenship would create a new permanent underclass in the United States and could even leave some children stateless. 

It would also impose hardship on all Americans, who could no longer point to a birth certificate as proof of citizenship. If place of birth no longer guaranteed citizenship, then all Americans—not just those whose parents were undocumented—would be forced to prove their parents’ nationality to the government in order to be recognized as a U.S. citizen. Many Americans would likely be denied citizenship based on government mistakes. 

Although President Trump cannot change the Constitution with an executive order, his threat to eliminate birthright citizenship at a highly political moment is not only divisive but fundamentally out of line with America ideals. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com

http://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a3937-Ending-Birthright-Citizenship-in-United-States.html

Family Unity Is Threatened By This New Immigration Enforcement Policy

Written by Tory Johnson 

In a directive dated Aug. 29, 2017, which U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement only posted publicly this week, the government significantly weakened safeguards for the rights of parents during the course of immigration enforcement. 

The release of the policy change comes amid growing concern that the Trump administration is increasing the separation of families as part of its immigration enforcement agenda. Without the specific guidance for exercising discretion, this directive has the potential to split up more families—increasing the number of children hurt by immigration enforcement. 

The “Detention and Removal of Alien Parents or Legal Guardians” directive replaces the agency’s previous policy, “Facilitating Parental Interests in the Course of Civil Immigration Enforcement Activities.” That policy—also known as the Parental Interests Directive—had been in effect since August 2013. 

While the 2013 policy was by no means perfect, the explicit emphasis and overall intent was critical: minimize the unintended consequences of immigration enforcement on parental rights and child well-being. 

The Trump administration’s new directive significantly diminishes mechanisms previously implemented to protect the parental rights of individuals in immigration proceedings. Significantly, it eliminates the 2013 guidance for applying prosecutorial discretion when a case involves children. 

The new directive includes the following changes: 

• Eliminates prior guidance for immigration officials to take into account an individual’s role as a parent, legal guardian, and/or a primary caretaker of a minor child when deciding whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion in a case.
• Eliminates guidance for ICE to facilitate a parent’s temporary return to the United States in order to participate in court proceedings affecting their parental rights.
• Does not specify that, should a parent be detained, initial detention should be as close as practically possible to the minor child(ren).
• Instructs ICE agents to generally accommodate a parent or legal guardian’s efforts to make care arrangements for their minor U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident child(ren), rather than immediately calling child protective services as instructed in the 2007 memorandum “Juveniles Encountered During Fugitive Operations.”
• Eliminates training instructions, requirements, and compliance mechanisms related to parental rights and interests.

Although some language remains the same—such as discouraging the transfer of a detained parent to a different ICE Field Office region—the intent of the new directive stands in stark contrast to the superseded Parental Interests Directive. 

The 2013 directive instructed ICE agents to ensure that immigration enforcement activities do not “unnecessarily disrupt the parental rights” of parents or legal guardians of minor children. The language in the new directive is considerably weaker: “ICE personnel should remain cognizant of the impact enforcement actions may have on a lawful permanent resident or U.S. citizen minor child(ren).” 

From policies themselves to the way they are implemented, the United States should reflect its values and keep families together. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

http://inmigracionyvisas.com/a3791-Family-Unity-Is-Threatened-By-This-New-Immigration.html

Immigration and Customs Enforcement Regularly Detains Children for Months at a Time

 

Written by Walter Ewing 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is notoriously tight-lipped when it comes to their internal operations. The agency rarely discloses basic details about where their immigration detention centers are located, how many people are detained, or what the cost is to keep these facilities operational. As one of the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration enforcement arms, this lack of transparency often makes it difficult to hold the agency accountable on their detention and treatment of immigrants.

Yet in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, ICE has done something it rarely does: publicly release information about how it operates. The information was handed over to the Immigrant Legal Resource Center—which made the FOIA request—and has been analyzed by the National Immigrant Justice Center. 

The data provides a revealing snapshot of the immigrant-detention business in the United States: 


Immigrant Detention Centers by the Numbers

Immigrants are detained in over 1,000 facilities that include not only Bureau of Prisons facilities, but also county jails, hospitals, and even hotels. For instance, thousands of people—including children—have been booked into the Quality Suites San Diego since 2016. The average daily number of detainees at the hotel in 2017 was 22 people, all of whom were classified as “non-criminal” with “no ICE threat level.” 

Within these facilities, a record 39,322 people are being held daily in 2018. This is the second year in a row that ICE has surpassed its previously record-setting detainee population. 


ICE Regularly Detains Children, Adults Classified as “Non-Criminal” 

Children are frequently detained, sometimes for months at a time. Often, they are held not in Office of Refugee Resettlement children’s shelters or even family detention centers—they are housed in juvenile jails under contracts with ICE. At the three facilities where children are held for more than 72 hours, length of detention ranges from 100 to 240 days. 

On average, 51 percent of the daily detained population is classified as “non-criminal”—and 51 percent were also classified as “no threat.” Only 23 percent qualified as Level 1 threats, which encompasses a mix of nonviolent offenses and serious crimes. 


Most Detainees Are Held in Privately Operated Prisons

Private prisons dominate the immigration-detention industry. Roughly 71 percent of the daily detained population was held in private prisons owned by companies such as Core Civic (formerly known as the Corrections Corporation of America). 

Many of these contracts with private, for-profit prison companies were made between local governments and the federal government. As of 2017, more than 15,000 people were held daily in private prisons or jails throughout the country. 


ICE’s Detention Standards Are Unclear

ICE has three different sets of standards governing the detention of adults, yet only 65 percent of the agency’s adult detention facilities are contractually bound to observe any of them. 

Some detention facilities make cryptic reference to abiding by “minimum service standards” or “local standards.” Perhaps this is on account of a 2014 Government Accountability Office report, which found ICE sometimes obtains a facility’s agreement to be inspected using a newer set of standards without actually incorporating the new standards into the contract. 

ICE claims that it inspects all facilities under one of its three sets of standards, regardless of the contract. Yet some facilities have passed inspection despite the deaths of multiple detainees, including some from medical neglect. 

The fact that so much prodding was necessary for ICE to release even this much information about its operations is an indication of the degree to which the agency lacks transparency or accountability. ICE officers—like their immigration-enforcement counterparts at U.S. Customs and Border Protection—are accustomed to acting behind a veil of secrecy. As this new disturbing information reveals, we must continue to push past that veil and hold ICE accountable for what happens within their detention centers.

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

http://inmigracionyvisas.com/a3781-Immigration-and-Customs-Enforcement-Regularly-Detains-Children.html 

Immigrants and Their Children Founded More Than Two-Fifths of All Fortune 500 Companies

Written by Walter Ewing - Business & the Workforce. 

The modern U.S. economy owes much of its success to the contributions of immigrants and their children. Among these contributions, it would be difficult to overstate the value of entrepreneurship. For instance, a new report from the Center for American Entrepreneurship (CAE) analyzes the role of immigrants and their children in 2017’s list of Fortune 500 companies. 

Companies founded by immigrants include AT&T; Verizon; Procter & Gamble; PepsiCo; Pfizer; Goldman Sachs; and Facebook. Those founded by the children of immigrants include Apple; Ford Motor; Home Depot; Boeing; IBM; McDonald’s; and Staples. In total, 43 percent of all Fortune 500 companies were founded by an immigrant or the child of an immigrant. 

These companies—which span numerous industries, from high-tech to retail to healthcare—wouldn’t exist if not for immigrants and their children. 

CAE’s findings highlight just how critical immigrants are to the success of these powerhouse companies. Fortune 500 firms created by immigrants or the children of immigrants “are headquartered in 33 of the 50 states, employ 12.8 million people worldwide, and accounted for $5.3 trillion in global revenue in 2016,” according to the report. 

Immigrants and their children are most prevalent among the biggest of the Fortune 500 companies, comprising 52 percent of the top 25 firms and 57 percent of the top 35. More precisely, 18.4 percent of today’s Fortune 500 companies were founded by at least one immigrant, and an additional 24.8 percent were founded by the child of an immigrant. 

Yet immigrant entrepreneurs are not only found at the upper reaches of the business hierarchy. According to an analysis of Census data by the American Immigration Council, immigrants also accounted for 20.3 percent of all self-employed U.S. residents in 2015 and generated $72.3 billion in business income. Immigrants also accounted for 21.9 percent of all business owners in 50 of the largest U.S. metropolitan areas in 2015. 

The authors of the CAE report conclude that its findings “demonstrate the remarkable and persistent importance of immigrants to the creation and growth of America’s largest, most successful, and most valuable companies.” 

Yet it’s important to keep in mind that entrepreneurship is but one way in which immigrants and children of immigrants add value to the U.S. economy. They are also workers, consumers, and taxpayers who contribute to economic growth and job creation in myriad ways.

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 
http://inmigracionyvisas.com/a3730-Immigrants-and-Their-Children-Founded-Companies.html