enforcement

Woodburn, Ore — The man accused of shooting and killing three people and injuring a fourth on a blueberry farm outside of Woodburn, has been deported from the U.S. six times since 2003.  The U.S. Immigration and Customes Enforcement spokeswoman says in a written statement:

“After conducting a comprehensive review of Mr. Oseguera’s immigration and criminal history, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has designated this as a federal interest case.  To that end, the agency filed a notice of action with the Marion County Jail asking to be alerted if or when Mr. Oseguera is slated for release so the agency can take custody ot pursue further administrative enforcement action.  Relevant databases indicate Mr. Oseguera has no significant prior criminal convictions.  However, he has been repatriated to Mexico six times since 2003, most recently in 2013”

Bonifacio Oseguera-Gonzalez is accused of shooting and killing 60-year old Ruben Rigoberto-Reyes, 26-year old Edmundo Amaro-Bajonero and 30 year old Katie Gildersleeve.  He also shot and injured 27-year old Refugio Modesto-DeLaCruz on June 27th.

Detectives still have not provided any motive for the shootings or how Oseguera is connected to the victims or the farm where the shooting took place.

  Read more about Woodburn Shooter Deported Six Times Since 2003

New statistics from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reveal that the surge of unaccompanied alien minors (UAMs) and family units crossing the southwest border is continuing undeterred. (See CBP Apprehension Statistics) The statistics, released last week, show that 5,669 UAMs — many coming from Central America — were apprehended crossing the southwest border in May. (MRC, June 17, 2016)

Additionally, some 6,788 family units were apprehended during the same time period. (Id.) Overall, the total number of all illegal alien apprehensions at the southwest border so far in FY 2016 is up roughly 19 percent from FY 2015 numbers during the same time period. (Id.) CBP reported catching 2,231 more illegal aliens in May than they did in April, which until last month was the record-holder for monthly apprehensions so far in FY2016. (Id.)

In a press release announcing the new statistics, CBP touted that Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Jeh Johnson recently visited Central America to reiterate that America's borders are not open to illegal migration. (See CBP Apprehension Statistics) However, the actions of the Obama administration say otherwise, as they have repeatedly refused to actually address the underlying causes of the illegal migration from Central America, notably the fact that UAMs and family units who cross the border know they will get to stay in the U.S. once they arrive.

Specifically, once Central American UAMs and family units are apprehended at the border, they receive papers setting court dates and are then released into the U.S. (FAIR Legislative Update, Dec. 1, 2015) These documents are known as "notices to appear," but illegal aliens refer to them as "permisos," or free passes, because they give permission to stay in the country while they await their appearance in already backlogged immigration courts. (Id.)

Testifying before a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing late last year, Chris Cabrera of the National Border Patrol Council stated that "[these documents] are now known as the ‘notice to disappear' — 80 percent, 90 percent of those folks will not show up for that hearing." (See Cabrera Testimony, Oct. 21, 2015; FAIR Legislative Update, Oct. 27, 2015) The decisive solution to the crisis at the border, according to Cabrera, is for illegal border crossers to be "detained, adjudicated, and repatriated." (Cabrera Testimony, Oct. 21, 2015) Read more about UAMs and Family Unit Border Surge Continues Undeterred

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court blocked President Obama's effort to protect more than 4 million undocumented immigrants from the threat of deportation Thursday, deadlocking 4-4 over a plan that had divided the nation as well as the justices.

The tie vote leaves intact lower federal court rulings that stopped the program in its tracks more than a year ago...

It was a sudden, crushing defeat for millions of parents who came to the country illegally and have lived in the shadows, often for decades. The administration had hoped that at least one of the more conservative justices -- possibly Chief Justice John Roberts -- would rule that the plan posed no financial threat to the states and therefore could not be challenged in court.

...the one-sentence opinion simply announced that the court was "equally divided" and unable to muster a majority for either side.

That's all opponents needed to block the "deferred action" program, which would have offered qualifying parents of children who were born in the United States or are legal residents the right to remain in the country...

The immigration battle was waged on two fronts before the court: The administration fought with the states as well as with the House of Representatives, which previously blocked the president's effort to confer legal status to some of the nation's more than 11 million illegal immigrants...

Obama announced the "Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents," or DAPA program, in November 2014. It would extend protections to more than 4 million parents who meet the criteria, just as a 2012 program did for immigrants brought to the United States as children. More than 700,000 have qualified for that earlier program.

Once qualified, parents also could apply for work authorization, pay taxes and receive some government benefits, such as Social Security. Those with criminal backgrounds or who have arrived since 2010 would not qualify.

Texas challenged Obama's authority to implement the policy by executive action, rather than going through Congress. Federal district court Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas, upheld the challenge in February 2015 and blocked the program from being implemented nationwide. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld that ruling last November in a 2-1 decision.

The Supreme Court agreed in January to hear the case, expanding its scope to include whether Obama's action violated the Constitution's "Take Care Clause" by failing to faithfully execute the nation's immigration laws.

In written briefs and oral arguments, the Justice Department contended that the policy only would make official what was happening anyway — undocumented immigrants who do not have criminal records and are not priorities for deportation are generally left alone. The government only has enough funds to deport about 400,000 a year, they said.

Lawyers for Texas and the House of Representatives countered that while the president can decide not to deport individual immigrants, only Congress can defer action on a class-wide basis.

The state's injury claim focused on what it said would have been the need to spend money issuing driver's licenses to hundreds of thousands of immigrants. Federal officials said that was Texas' choice, and not a ground for a lawsuit. Read more about Deadlocked Supreme Court blocks Obama on immigration

The Supreme Court on Thursday blocked President Obama’s immigration executive actions, in a tie decision that delivers a win to states challenging his plan to give a deportation reprieve to millions of illegal immigrants. 

The justices' one-sentence opinion on Thursday effectively kills the plan for the duration of Obama's presidency.

The 4-4 tie vote sets no national precedent but leaves in place the ruling by the lower court. In this case, the federal appeals court in New Orleans said the Obama administration lacked the authority to shield up to 4 million immigrants from deportation and make them eligible for work permits without approval from Congress.

Texas led 26 Republican-dominated states in challenging the program Obama announced in November 2014. Congressional Republicans also backed the states' lawsuit. 

The decision lands in the middle of a heated election season...

Democrats have, in turn, called his rhetoric racially divisive..

The case dealt with two separate Obama programs. One would allow undocumented immigrants who are parents of either U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents to live and work in the U.S. without the threat of deportation. The other would expand an existing program to protect from deportation a larger population of immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children. 

Obama decided to move forward after Republicans won control of the Senate in the 2014 midterm elections...

The Senate had passed a broad immigration bill with Democratic and Republican support in 2013, but the measure went nowhere in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives.

The states quickly went to court to block the Obama initiatives.

Their lawsuit was heard initially by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas. Hanen previously had criticized the administration for lax immigration enforcement. Hanen sided with the states, blocking the programs from taking effect. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also ruled for the states, and the Justice Department rushed an appeal to the high court so that it could be heard this term.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. Read more about Supreme Court blocks Obama immigration plan

WASHINGTON, D.C.– A media briefing by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) highlighted the issues of illegal aliens, legal immigration, and the economic, job, social, cultural, and political costs caused to average Americans. These factors have made these issues national topics of discussion during this presidential election.

...to attend a one-day seminar hosted by CIS. On the night before the seminar, Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) spoke at a reception for the attendees at the National Press Club. He addressed re-shaping immigration policy so that it serves the interest of Americans.

Americans want to know who is coming into the country, and why, and they want to know how it is affecting their bottom line. They want to know how it is affecting the “America” they grew up in. Americans are also insecure about the intentions of those who come into our country and about the crimes they perpetrate.

Americans want to know if the refugees, asylees, and immigrants allowed in our country will “assimilate” to America, or if they will demand that our society conforms to their culture...

Salaries have not increased for years, job benefits are being cut, including health benefits. The amount of taxes U.S. citizens have to pay for social services benefits, and for educating the children of illegal aliens, matters to Americans in a day when wages, health benefits, and job opportunities are shrinking. The federal government is demanding that more and more immigrants be allowed in the country, and the government is increasing the number of visas to allow foreigners into the country to work.

Organizations like the Center for Immigration Studies is helping educate the public on these issues by educating those who have the ability to communicate to vast numbers of Americans.

The Center for Immigration Studies describes its organization as “an independent, non-partisan, non-profit, research organization.” They explain, “Since our founding in 1985, we have pursued a single mission – providing immigration policymakers, the academic community, news media, and concerned citizens with reliable information about the social, economic, environmental, security, and fiscal consequences of legal and illegal immigration into the United States.”

CIS says that the information collected by the Center over the past twenty-five years “has led many of our researchers to conclude that current, high levels of immigration are making it harder to achieve such important national objectives as better public schools, a cleaner environment, homeland security, and a living wage for every native-born and immigrant worker.”

The seminar covered research relating to the issues of the impact of immigration on Americans, immigration and public security, the present number of deportations, removals, and apprehensions, along with other immigration-related issues.

The website for the Center for Immigration Studies says that many of their researchers are “animated by a ‘low-immigration, pro-immigrant’ vision of an America that admits fewer immigrants but affords a warmer welcome for those who are admitted.

Lana Shadwick is a writer and legal analyst for Breitbart Texas. She has served as a prosecutor and associate judge in Texas. Follow her on Twitter @LanaShadwick2.
  Read more about Americans First — National Think-Tank Briefs Media on Immigration's Impact on America

Almost a decade after he took an 11-year-old Keizer girl, who he claimed was his "girlfriend," to Mexico, a 28-year-old man was sentenced to 22 years and 11 months in prison.

In 2007, Raul Xalamihua-Espindola, then 19, fled to Zongolica, Veracruz, Mexico, with the girl. The crime took Xalamihua-Espindola and his victim across the United States, down to Mexico and eventually back to Oregon.

Xalamihua-Espindola pleaded guilty to three counts of first-degree rape and appeared for sentencing before Marion County Circuit Court Judge David Leith on Monday.

At his sentencing, Xalamihua-Espindola spoke through two translators — one translating English to Spanish and the other translating Spanish to Nahuatl, a Central Mexican language also known as Aztec.

The victim and her family declined to attend the sentencing, but Deputy District AttorneyTobias Tingleaf said they were satisfied with the resolution reached. Tingleaf recommended three consecutive sentences, totaling to 25 years, for Xalamihua-Espindola's charges.

Members of the Keizer Police Department sat in the courtroom, finally witnessing a resolution to the years-long investigation.

"The detectives involved were relentless and did not give up," said Tingleaf, who was a law clerk in Marion County at the time of the girl's disappearance. "We are here today because of their work."

Keizer police began their investigation after the girl left a note for her parents saying she ran away with her boyfriend. The note said not to worry about the girl's well-being, but it didn't match her handwriting, according to an affidavit filed in August 2007.

The girl's friends told police she had a boyfriend named "Raul." Police determined a man of that name lived in the same apartment complex as the victim and identified him as Xalamihua-Espindola.

The girl was rescued and returned home a few months later, but Xalamihua-Espindola eluded capture until two years ago. He was eventually captured and held in a Mexican jail. In December 2015, he was extradited back to the United States.

It is often difficult to bring criminals back to the United States to face prosecution, Tingleaf said.

Keizer Police Deputy Chief Jeffrey Kuhns attended the trial along with several investigators involved in the case.

"The defendant’s capture in Mexico, extradition back to the United States and being sentenced to prison for the crimes he committed over nine years ago in 2007 is a great example of the investigators' resolve to hold this criminal accountable for his actions and bad choices," Kuhns said. "Not once did the Keizer Police Department or the many law enforcement partners who assisted stop the investigation or our pursuit of justice."

Xalamihua-Espindola, who initially pleaded not guilty, pleaded guilty to three counts of first-degree rape in May. One count of rape and one count of first-degree custodial interference were dismissed as part of a plea agreement.

Through his translators, he said he did not know what he was doing was a crime. In Mexico, young girls marrying older men is a common custom, he said.

"Are you saying that in your culture, taking an 11-year-old from her home without her parents permission to have sex with her is acceptable?" Leith asked him.

"Yes, all of that is acceptable," Xalamihua-Espindola replied.

He dropped to his knees and pleaded for forgiveness from Leith.

"It's not my role to dispense forgiveness," Leith said after hearing the defendant's appeal for mercy. "That would be for the victims of the crimes to decide."

Xalamihua-Espindola's attorney, John Storkel, argued for a shorter, concurrent sentence of eight years and four months, citing his client's lack of criminal history, his poor, humble background, reference letters, cultural differences and the two years he spent held in a Mexican jail.

Leith said he wanted the sentence to match the enormity of the crime.

"In our culture, these are among the most serious crimes that can be committed," he said, adding he did not believe abducting, kidnapping and raping children would be acceptable in any culture.

Leith sentenced Xalamihua-Espindola to eight years and four months for each of the first-degree rape counts. All but two years of the sentence will run consecutively. Upon his release, he is required to register as a sex offender.

First-degree rape is a Measure 11 offense and carries a mandatory minimum sentence of eight years and four months. Read more about Man who took 11-year-old to Mexico sentenced to 23 years