illegal aliens

Oregon State Police troopers last week intercepted nearly a quarter-million dollars worth of crystal methamphetamine on its way from Southern California to Washington in two separate vehicle stops on Interstate 5 in Jackson County, authorities said.

The biggest haul came on April 1 when a traffic stop of a northbound vehicle near milepost 35 netted 28 pounds of crystal methamphetamine and the arrest of that vehicle's driver, with a similar stop April 3 near milepost 13 gaining another pound of the illegal drugs, OSP reported.

"It was officers looking past the initial traffic stop and developing some reasonable suspicions that led to consent searches," OSP Sgt. Jim Johnson said.

In the April 1 stop, driver Raymundo Cota Sauceda, 40, of Washington, was pulled over for an unspecified traffic infraction and told police he was en route from Southern California to Seattle, police said. After further investigation a consent search was made and a narcotic canine came to the scene to assist, police said.

The packaged methamphetamine was found in a cardboard box in the vehicle's trunk, and Sauceda was arrested on charges of possession and manufacturing of methamphetamine, police said.

The packaged methamphetamine was found in a cardboard box in the vehicle's trunk, and Sauceda was arrested on charges of possession and manufacturing of methamphetamine, police said.

In the April 3 stop, Martinez Miguel Navarro, 44, was stopped for an unspecified traffic infraction. With his consent, officers searched his vehicle and found about a pound of meth under the front seat, OSP reported.

Methamphetamine has a running street value in Southern Oregon of about $7,000 to $8,000 a pound, but it does fluctuate, Johnson said.

"It's cheaper when you get down to the border and more expensive as you go north," Johnson said.

Navarro was being held Monday in the Jackson County Jail on a fugitive warrant out of Washington and on a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement hold, jail records state. No jail records were found on Sauceda on Monday.

The investigation was conducted by troopers from the Oregon State Police Highway Interdiction team, Oregon State Police Drug Enforcement Section and agents from Homeland Security. The investigation is ongoing.

"We're hoping that there's possibly more arrests," Johnson said.

  Read more about Two I-5 traffic stops net 29 pounds of meth

AUSTIN, Texas—A Texas federal judge late Tuesday night declined to lift his injunction blocking the Obama administration’s immigration action to defer deportations for more than four million people in the country illegally.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen declined a request by the administration to lift his Feb. 16 ruling temporarily blocking the administration from proceeding with the immigration plans, announced by President Barack Obama in November.

Texas and officials from 25 other largely Republican states sued to stop Mr. Obama’s action, arguing that it was an unconstitutional overreach of presidential power.

The Justice Department has already appealed the matter to the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is set to hear oral arguments in the case on April 17...

Judge Hanen also issued a separate ruling Tuesday night allowing the states to conduct discovery into their separate claim that the administration, beginning late last year, improperly implemented part of its immigration program, even though it had allegedly represented to Judge Hanen that it wouldn’t do so until February.

Texas made the complaint after the federal government revealed in a court filing that it had granted some immigrants deferred deportation under the DACA program for three years, the new terms called for in the November executive action, rather than the prior two-year deferral...

Judge Hanen found that the administration has made multiple “misleading” statements about the implementation of its immigration program. He ordered the administration to produce a range of documents and information by April 21 related to its representations to the court about the rollout of the program.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is leading the suit by the states, said in a statement that Judge Hanen’s ruling affirms that “once put into effect, President Obama’s executive amnesty program will be virtually impossible to reverse.” He added: “Any premature implementation could have serious consequences, inflicting irreparable harm on our state.”
  Read more about Judge Keeps Injunction on Obama’s Immigration Plan

Most voters continue to believe federal government policies encourage illegal immigration.

Most voters in nearly every demographic category agree that the federal government is not aggressive enough in its deportation policies. Most also believe very strongly that someone should have to prove they are a U.S. citizen before obtaining government benefits.

Most women and men agree that a child born to an illegal immigrant in this country should not automatically become a U.S. citizen.

Voters under 40 are only slightly less supportive than their elders of more aggressive deportation policies. But they are much more likely than those 40 and over to think that a child born to an illegal alien in this country should automatically become a U.S. citizen.

Sixty percent of whites oppose automatic citizenship; 51 percent of blacks and 56 percent of other minority voters favor it.

Eighty-one percent of Republicans and 68 percent of voters not affiliated with either major party think the government is not aggressive enough in deporting illegal immigrants. Just 40 percent of Democrats agree. But then Democrats are far more concerned than the others that deportation efforts may end up violating the civil rights of some U.S. citizens.

Democrats by a 51 percent to 33 percent margin believe illegals who have American-born children should be exempt from deportation. Sixty-two percent of GOP voters and 60 percent of unaffiliated voters disagree.

More than half of voters remain opposed to Obama’s new plan that will allow nearly five million illegal immigrants to remain in this country legally and apply for jobs. Forty-seven percent (47 percent) think Congress should try to find ways to stop the president’s plan, while 41 percent believe Congress should allow this decision to stand.

Voters also continue to strongly support voter ID laws and don't consider them discriminatory. Read more about Rasmussen Poll: Majority Continues to Reject Obama Amnesty Plan

A surge of undocumented immigrants seeking driver’s licenses has surprised the California Department of Motor Vehicles, pouring in at twice the rate officials expected and underscoring massive interest in the new program.

  Read more about Driver’s license demand surges

Former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican known for clashing with the Obama administration on illegal immigration, will speak at a GOP political fundraiser in Eugene next week.

Brewer will be the keynote speaker at the Lane County Republican Party’s annual Lincoln Day Dinner on April 9.

“She is a strong, politically courageous leader and inspiring speaker,” said Cindy Land, Lane County Republican Party chairwoman. “We are excited to hear her uplifting message, as we stand up against one-party rule for better jobs, better educational opportunities and better individual freedom for Oregonians.”

Brewer was Arizona’s governor from 2009 until this January, when the Arizona Constitution’s term limits ended her run.

She became famous four years ago for signing a bill to crack down on illegal immigration in Arizona. The Obama administration opposed the bill.

A year later, Brewer again made headlines after a photo was taken of her pointing a finger at President Obama when she greeted him at the Phoenix airport.

In 2013, the left-leaning Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, D.C., rated Brewer as one of the worst governors in America, while the conservative Newsmax magazine that same year named Brewer among the 25 most influential women in the GOP.

In an interview, Brewer said she will talk to Lane County Republicans about education, illegal immigration and other issues.

“I’m going to talk about how the federal government has disappointed us on illegal immigration,” she said. “And I’ll talk about what is right with our country, what is wrong with our country, and how we can make it better.”

The Lincoln Day Dinner is the local GOP’s main way to raise money so it can support Republican candidates.

In recent years, the local party has paid Sarah Palin, John Bolton and other well-known Republicans to speak at the event, which typically takes place after February.

Instead, Community Action Network, the political action committee of the conservative-leaning Eugene group Healthy Communities Initiative, brought former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee to town as the keynote speaker for its own political fundraiser.

Land, who ran unopposed for the top post in the county GOP party, was elected by GOP central committee members in November.

“Last year, we had some very passionate individuals who had some very strong opinions that caused some confusion in the party,” she said.

“It took a while for it to work its way through the system, and for leadership to listen and be inclusive of everyone in the party. We are a much stronger organization today than we were a year ago.”

Dennis Morgan, executive director of Community Action Network, said he’s glad the local Republican Party will resume hosting the event.

“It’s great they got it organized and they could put it on,” he said.

For Brewer’s speech, Republicans hope to sell 300 tickets, most for $100 apiece.

Land said the agreement with Brewer’s speaking engagement firm prevents her from disclosing Brewer’s speaking fee. Read more about Ex-Arizona governor to address GOP

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials say that refusal by jails to cooperate with so-called “detainers” is resulting in unauthorized immigrants with violent criminal pasts – including alleged rapists, child abusers and drug traffickers – being released in New Mexico before federal authorities can take them into custody.

But the counties being asked to hold those individuals are pushing back, citing lawsuits and costs, among other objections.

Nearly every New Mexico county detention center, along with hundreds of other jurisdictions around the country, have in most circumstances stopped honoring ICE’s 48-hour “detainer” – a request to hold arrested persons whom the agency suspects are in the country illegally.

The detainers have become a flashpoint in the debate over how local law enforcement should aid federal immigration authorities and reveal a strain in that relationship after years of closer ties.

ICE provided the Journal with a half-dozen sample cases from 2014 “in which dangerous criminal aliens were released from New Mexico jails since they failed to honor ICE detainers.” Among them were:

- A 30-year-old Mexican male charged with two counts of criminal sexual penetration of a minor, released in December.

- A 28-year-old Mexican female charged with intentional child abuse resulting in great bodily harm, released in July.

- A 39-year-old Mexican male charged with two counts of trafficking a controlled substance, three counts of child abuse, receiving or transferring of stolen motor vehicles, tampering with evidence and possessing drug paraphernalia, released in March last year.

ICE did not say whether those individuals were convicted on those charges before their release.

But New Mexico counties say ICE has no business asking them to hold people without charge – especially since counties, including Doña Ana and San Juan, are increasingly facing litigation for doing so. U.S. District Court last month said the federal government must be a party to a lawsuit by three unauthorized immigrants who claim San Juan County wrongly detained them under an ICE hold.

Counties say ICE should be held to the standards of other federal law enforcement agencies and charge people with an immigration crime, seek a warrant for their arrest or arrest them upon their release.

“County jails can’t hold a person unless they are criminally charged,” said Matt Elwell, director of the Luna County Detention Center, which stopped honoring ICE detainers three years ago. “That is the difference between a detainer and charge. A detainer says ‘just hold this person,’ and legally we can’t. If (ICE agents) have enough time to put a detainer, I say why don’t you just charge them with a criminal act?”

Counties in a bind

Here’s how the detainer has historically been used: Police arrest someone on a criminal charge such as domestic violence or a serious traffic violation. While the person awaits a chance to post bond or complete a sentence, and ICE suspects he has also violated immigration laws, ICE places a detainer, asking the jail to hold him 48 hours to give ICE a chance to assume custody – on the county’s dime and without filing an additional immigration charge.

Counties say those requests put them in a bind.

The New Mexico Association of Counties reports that at least 24 of 28 county detention centers statewide no longer honor the detainer. ICE confirmed that “most of the jurisdictions in New Mexico do not honor ICE detainers.”

San Juan County Detention Center Administrator Thomas Havel, who is named in the lawsuit, offers this message to ICE: “Don’t put us in peril, give us a bona fide charge and we’ll hold an individual. That’s all it takes.”

Additionally, when a hold is in place, ICE doesn’t foot the bill, the county does. In Doña Ana County, that amounts to $62 a day. In Santa Fe, it’s $85 a day.

“I feel very confident in saying that the vast majority of law enforcement agencies would see the need and the benefit to cooperate with ICE,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that favors tougher immigration controls. “They don’t feel ICE has been abusing its authority. But the problem now is the threat of litigation.”

Detainers denied

ICE issued 600 detainers in New Mexico in fiscal year 2014 but said it does not routinely track the number of detainers that aren’t honored. However, The Associated Press reported that in the first eight months of 2014, localities nationwide declined 8,800 of the roughly 105,000 detainer requests filed by immigration officers.

“The release of serious criminal offenders to the community, rather than to ICE custody for removal, undermines ICE’s ability to protect public safety and impedes ICE from enforcing the nation’s immigration laws,” ICE said in a statement.

ICE declined to describe its current policy for taking custody of unauthorized immigrants in New Mexico, saying it “does not discuss specific operating methods.”

‘Constitutional’ issues

Jurisdictions across the country increasingly began to deny ICE detainers thanks to a U.S. Court of Appeals decision a year ago ruling that detainers are nonbinding requests and do not carry the force of a criminal charge or warrant.

Vicki Gaubeca, director of the ACLU’s Regional Center for Border Rights in Las Cruces, said ICE detainers “raise serious constitutional problems.”

“No right is more firmly ingrained in our Constitution … than the right not to be left in jail indefinitely without charges filed or an opportunity to post bail,” she said. “States and municipalities would open themselves to liability if they treated ICE detainers as if they were sentences imposed by a court.”

New Mexico counties have been faced with tort claims for wrongful detention.

Doña Ana County was one of the last New Mexico counties to stop honoring the detainers, ending the practice last May. The county got tangled in litigation when two Mexican women sued after the jail prohibited them from posting bond and imprisoned them for two months on the basis of a 48-hour ICE hold.

The women, sisters Hortencia and Maria Acahua Zepahua, had been living in New Mexico for 12 years and had applied for legal residency.

“We are under more scrutiny than ICE would be,” said Chris Barela, director of the Doña Ana County Detention Center. “There was a time when we used to ask the citizenship. That is no longer allowed.”

New priorities

Cooperation between local and federal law enforcement on immigration issues in recent years had been dictated by the Secure Communities program, under which detainers were issued until U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson discontinued Secure Communities in a Nov. 20 memo to ICE.

“The goal of Secure Communities was to more effectively identify and facilitate the removal of criminal aliens in the custody of state and local law enforcement agencies,” Johnson said in the memo. “But the reality is the program has attracted a great deal of criticism, is widely misunderstood and is embroiled in litigation; its very name has become a symbol for general hostility toward the enforcement of our immigration laws.”

Johnson instructed ICE to replace requests for detention with requests for notification. Rather than ask a county jail to hold individuals beyond their release date, Johnson told ICE to ask local law enforcement to inform the agency of a pending release.

DHS spokeswoman Marsha Catron said a transition is underway to replace Secure Communities with the “Priority Enforcement Program,” which reflects the administration’s focus on targeting unauthorized immigrants who are also convicted criminals.

“ICE will now only seek transfer under PEP of an individual in state or local law enforcement custody if that individual has a conviction for a criminal offense, is suspected of terrorism or espionage, or otherwise poses a danger to national security,” Catron said in a statement.

New reality

New Mexico counties describe varying degrees of communication with ICE, from solid working relationships to minimal interaction. Several detention centers said they provide ICE with a daily roster of inmates so that the agency can run the names and determine whether to bring immigration charges.

Elwell in Luna County described a good relationship with local ICE agents. On the other end of the spectrum, Barela said Doña Ana doesn’t communicate with ICE at all – not even emailing a daily roster – to protect itself from liability. ICE agents drop by “every couple of days” in person to review the list, he

“We don’t send them anything anymore,” he said.

Mark Caldwell, warden of the Santa Fe Adult Detention Facility, said, “Once the detainers were not honored, we really haven’t been in communication.”
  Read more about Detentions put counties, ICE at odds

PHOENIX — Raul Reynoso got a bonus when he renewed the federal work permit he received through President Obama's 2012 program granting protection from deportation to undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children.

He was expecting a two-year permit. Instead, his new permit doesn't expire for three years, until 2017...

Reynoso is one of more than 100,000 so-called "dreamers" who received three-year work permits under Obama's executive actions on immigration before U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen issued a preliminary injunction temporarily halting the programs in February.

Now Reynoso and the other dreamers are caught a bitter legal dispute over whether the Justice Department intentionally misled the judge by failing to disclose that the government had already started issuing three-year permits to some dreamers.

The revelation, which came to light after Hanen issued his injunction, has further incensed 26 states, including Arizona, that have filed a lawsuit seeking to block Obama's programs aimed at offering protection from deportation to an additional 4 million undocumented immigrants.

Hanen, who oversees the U.S. District Court in Brownsville, Texas, issued the injunction Feb. 16, just before the first of Obama's new programs was set to begin accepting applications on Feb. 18.

Now Reynoso and the others may have to give back the three-year permits if Hanen determines the Obama administration violated the injunction by failing to tell the judge that the government had already started issuing three-year permits before Obama's executive actions were scheduled to start.

That could leave dreamers such as Reynoso to reapply for two-year permits, or it could leave them with no work permits at all.

"Absolutely ... it's something to be concerned about," said Reynoso, who works as an insurance agent and came to the U.S. from Mexico when he was 6.

Obama announced on Nov. 20 that since Congress had failed to pass legislation reforming the nation's immigration system, he was going to use his executive authority to offer protection from deportation and work permits to about 4 million of the 12 million immigrants in the country illegally.

The president's actions included expanding his 2012 program for undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children by removing an age cap that limited the program to those under the age of 31. The actions also created a new program for undocumented parents with children who are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.

The actions, spelled out in a memo issued by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, also said that effective Nov. 24, everyone approved for protection from deportation would receive three-year work permits instead of the two-year permits issued under the existing 2012 program.

Shortly afterward, Texas and 25 other states filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block Obama's programs from taking effect by arguing they were created illegally.

In the meantime, the government issued three-year work permits to 108,081 people, including Reynoso, from Nov. 24 until the injunction was issued. Those people had applied for protection from deportation under the existing program, known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.

But Hanen didn't find that out until March 3, nearly two weeks after he issued his injunction, when Justice Department lawyers notified him in court papers.

The judge was furious. For weeks leading up to the Feb. 16 injunction, Justice Department lawyers had insisted that the government was not scheduled to start implementing Obama's programs until Feb. 18.

"So, like an idiot, I believed that," Hanen said during a testy court hearing March 19.

Ruling expected soon
Government lawyers contend it was simply an oversight. During the hearing, they told Hanen they were so focused on the start of the new deferred-action programs, they neglected to mention that the government had already started issuing three-year permits under the old program, which was not affected by Hanen's ruling.

But lawyers from the states want to know if the government intentionally withheld the information knowing that once the government started issuing three-year permits, it would be hard "to put the toothpaste back in the tube."

They contend the states have already suffered "irreparable injury" because undocumented immigrants can use their three-year work permits to get driver's licenses that also last for three years. That's because driver's licenses are issued for the length of time a person who receives deferred action can remain lawfully in the U.S.

Hanen is expected to rule any day on a motion filed by the states, asking him to force the Justice Department to turn over documents to determine if the government intentionally misled the court.

The judge said he will also decide whether he will order the government to revoke the three-year permits if he determines the government violated the injunction.

"He could order the government to take back the three-year permits and reissue two-year permits. He could do nothing. Or he could revoke them altogether," said Nora Preciado, a lawyer at the National Immigration Law Center, an advocacy organization in Los Angeles.

Hanen has already denied the Justice Department's request to lift the injunction and allow Obama's programs to go forward until the merits of the case can be decided. As a result, the Justice Department has filed a motion with the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans to lift Hanen's injunction.

Meanwhile, dreamers across the country are worried about losing their three-year permits...

He came to the U.S. from Mexico when he was 4. He graduated from the University of Houston in 2012 with a degree in political science.

Espinosa is now the executive director of Fiel Houston, a non-profit organization that helps undocumented immigrants apply for deferred action... Read more about 100,000 'dreamers' could lose 3-year work permits

SALEM — Oregon lawmakers are considering expanding a controversial 2013 law dubbed “tuition equity,” which allowed certain illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates at Oregon’s seven public universities.

This year, Senate Bill 932 would let those students — who must be Oregon high school graduates — receive state-funded need-based college scholarships through the Oregon Opportunity Grant program. The scholarships are up to $2,000 per student per year.

Proponents of the bill argue that those eligible, who’ve often spent much of their life in this country, face an unfair disadvantage in paying for college, because they aren’t eligible for subsidized federal student loans or most public scholarship programs.

“The lack of access to any kind of financial aid is a real barrier for these students,” said Sen. Michael Dembrow, a Portland Democrat who spearheaded the initial “tuition equity” policy and is a chief sponsor on SB 932.

“The Opportunity Grant program was designed for precisely this type of student: low-income, first-generation college attendee,” he said. “These students are Oregonians like everyone else.”

But the proposal comes at a tricky time for majority Democrats. Last November, Oregon voters thrashed, by a 2-to-1 ratio, a proposal to grant short-term driving licenses to illegal immigrants. Lawmakers had passed that measure in 2013 with bipartisan support.

Advocates at Oregonians for Immigration Reform, a group that fought that measure, have been caught off guard by SB 932.

“When legislators passed (the “tuition equity” bill) they said repeatedly that it wouldn’t allow these students to receive government financial aid,” said Jim Ludwick, a spokesman for the group. “Two years later, we’re going right back on it.”

The new proposal is also controversial because the Oregon Opportunity Grant program, the state’s primary college aid spending, has been woefully underfunded recently. Only around 20 percent of eligible students received the grants this year, essentially on a “first-come-first-served” basis.

To address that, lawmakers are proposing to bolster state funding for the grant program by around $30 million in the next two-year budget cycle, about a 25 percent increase.

But regardless, Ludwick said, passage of SB 932 would mean that “citizens will be competing against illegal aliens for these scholarships.”

“When you have such a resounding vote (on the driving license measure), with 35 out of 36 counties opposing it, it means that the vast majority of citizens don’t want special benefits for illegal immigrants,” he said. “I don’t think you could see it any other way.”

Dembrow countered that SB 932 and the drivers’ card vote as two “separate issues.”

“People understand who these students are,” he said. “They’ve grown up here, they’ve gone to our high schools ... Students from out-of-state can live in Oregon for one year and be eligible (for an opportunity grant). These students aren’t.”

The Oregon Opportunity Grant program doled out $58 million this school year to 35,000 students at eligible private and public Oregon community college and universities. Students’ families must have a gross income under $70,000 annually to be eligible. Students received a maximum of $2,000 this year.

Maria Saldana, a high school senior from Salem who has received federal deferred immigration status, was one of several students who urged lawmakers to approve SB 932 at a public hearing last month.

“I panicked when I realized that all my plans of paying for college with need-based financial aid, scholarships and even student loans would automatically be eliminated” because of her status, she said. “It is stressful knowing that I do not qualify for a lot of the help that my peers do.”
The number of students who have received in-state tuition rates in Oregon because the initial “tuition equity” bill, is “overwhelmingly small,” said Rep. Jessica Vega-Pederson, a Portland Democrat, at the hearing.

Thirty-two students used the program in the 2013-14 school year. An estimated 76 students used it in the 2014-15 fall term. Legislative analysts expect the number to grow.

Vega-Pederson also noted that six other states, including Washington State and California, allow illegal-immigrant “tuition equity” students to access state financial aid.

SB 932 also would make a couple of minor changes to the 2013 “tuition equity” law. It would remove the requirement that an illegal-immigrant student would have to start college within three years of high school graduation be eligible for in-state tuition. A requirement that they complete a college degree in five years would also be eliminated.

The bill appears to have some traction.

The Senate Education and Workforce Development Committee approved it on a party-line vote this week, sending it to the Legislature’s budget committee.

The bill also has one powerful sponsor: Senate President Peter Courtney, a Salem Democrat. Courtney was unavailable to comment on the bill this week.

Sen. Tim Knopp, a Bend Republican who voted “no” on SB 932 in committee, said he believes that the federal government needs “to act on immigration and secure our border.”

“Having states provide additional benefits to undocumented immigrants sends the wrong message to others that might wish to come to the U.S.,” he said.

“This bill has been portrayed as not being very costly,” Knopp added. “But if it costs a citizen the opportunity to receive their grant, that should be concerning to everyone.”

If SB 932 passed in its current form, the measure couldn’t be referred to voters, like the drivers’ license measure was. That’s because lawmakers have included an “emergency clause” in the bill, which means it would go into effect immediately on passage. Without an emergency clause, opponents would have the normal 90 days to collect the necessary signatures to refer the policy to voters at the next general election.

Dembrow said the emergency clause was included in SB 932 because he wants “tuition equity” students to be able to access opportunity grants in the coming school year.

But Ludwick said the bill clearly doesn’t address an actual emergency. The clause is being used to block a referral to voters, he said, as lawmakers often do with controversial bills.

“It’s clear that the framers of our Constitution wanted citizens to have a right to refer laws” to a public vote, he said. “The Legislature wants to deny citizens that right to the referral process.”
  Read more about Controversial Oregon bill would give state college aid to illegal immigrants