Seth Freed Wessler

(0 comments, 147 posts)

This user hasn't shared any profile information

Home page: http://www.racewire.org/

Posts by Seth Freed Wessler

How East Haven, Conn., Became Synonymous With Racial Profiling

0
How East Haven, Conn., Became Synonymous With Racial Profiling

On Sunday afternoon, about 10 men and a couple of women were gathered inside La Bamba’s, a Latino-owned bar on Main Street in East Haven, Conn. “Look at this place,” said manager Esdras Marin, gesturing toward the empty bar. “On a Sunday afternoon like this, this place would have been full. People are afraid to come. The police come by here and harass us.”

In November 2008, an officer waiting outside of the bar pushed Marin’s brother to the ground, driving his chin into the concrete and drawing blood. The officer handcuffed the man’s hands behind his back and then proceeded to kick him repeatedly.

“The cops are out of control,” said Marin.

Each of the men and women in the bar on Sunday had a story to tell about the police harassment. A 40-year-old construction worker who’d come to East Haven from Ecuador a decade ago recalled, “It was winter and they took my car when they stopped me and they made me walk through he snow.” He added, “My friend left and went back to Ecuador out of fear. They arrested him and beat him up in jail. He got out and left.”

The stories are the same all over town: Latino residents who’ve been profiled, beat up, followed and taunted by local police officers. They’re the stories that populate dozens of pages of recently released legal documents manifesting a clear pattern of unchecked police violence.

In December, the Justice Department issued a report charging that the East Haven cops systemically profile and harass Latinos. Last week, the FBI arrested four of East Haven’s 49 active-duty officers on related criminal charges. East Haven’s Mayor Joseph Maturo then made national headlines when he offered to solve the city’s racism problems by eating tacos for dinner. On Monday, facing growing outcry from across the country, including the mocking delivery of 500 tacos to his office, Maturo announced that his police chief, Leonard Gallo, would resign.

The swirling events in the 30,000-person town have for good reason been focused on needed change in the city’s government and police force. Advocates and residents have long understood East Haven to be a hotbed of racism from a lawless and unaccountable police force. Many people of color have left the area. Others continue to live in fear.

But the events unfolding in East Haven point to a related problem that’s gone largely without discussion in the last two months of disarray. As East Haven’s police have been profiling and harassing Latino residents for the last five years, they have also been shuttling them into deportation proceedings.

After profiling, falsely arresting and often brutalizing Latinos in town, the cops routinely called ICE to report those without papers, locals charge. “When they come into this bar,” explains Marin, “the first thing they check is immigration status. And then they’ll probably call immigration.”

Even as the Department of Justice was investigating the police for alleged civil and criminal violations, another federal agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, was acting in cahoots with the East Haven cops’ assault on immigrants.

ICE has consistently claimed that its enforcement practices do not rely on racial profiling to find immigrants and that it only deports serious criminals. The unfolding drama in East Haven does significant damage to that claim.

From Italian to Latino

In the middle of the 2000s, the demographics of East Haven began to shift. Latinos from surrounding areas began moving to East Haven for cheaper rent and a calmer life. Shops with names like Los Amigos and La Bamba’s opened on Main Street. The Latino population grew from 4 percent of the city’s residents in 2000 to 10 percent in 2010.

For some white residents, the changes felt like an existential threat.

Ferdinando Cerrato, a 79-year-old man dressed in a worn corduroy jacket, stood in the town office building waiting to pay his taxes after the mayor announced Gallo’s departure on Monday. “They’ve destroyed our culture and our history,” he said. “Everything you see and everywhere you go, everything is in Spanish.”

Referring to the FBI’s recent arrests, Cerrato told Colorlines.com, “The cops are the wrong ones to be arrested. The Latinos should be arrested because they are illegal.”

Cerrato says his parents were Italian immigrants who “came to the U.S. in 1928 and waited in line to come in. Back then, we came the right way. Now you can enter illegal and then they get rewarded instead of arrested.”

The only book on Italian immigration to Connecticut in the town’s public library paints a different picture of that history. The book’s author wrote that in 1927 her Italian father and uncle “didn’t have enough money for the trip … so a friend of theirs helped them to stow away on the ship.” He was later deported.

Under the leadership of Gallo, the police department of the predominantly Italian-American town forgot this history as it honed in on Latino migrants, in what appears to be a ruthless attempt to drive them out.

On Sunday afternoon, a man named Fernando stood chatting with others inside My Country Store, another Latino-owned business on Main Street. “Basically,” explained Fernando, who works for a company fixing train tracks in New Haven, “if you’re Latino they don’t ask you to open your window. They pin you up against the car and hit you. And then they threaten you with deportation and call immigration.”

East Haven cops have a long history of targeting and brutalizing communities of color. In 1997, an East Haven police officer followed a 21-year-old unarmed black man named Malik Jones from East Haven to New Haven and shot him to death.

The year after Jones was murdered, newly elected Mayor Maturo appointed Gallo as chief. It was a questionable decision: Gallo had been a rising star officer in nearby New Haven, but known for brutish police tactics. According to the New Haven Independent, in 1990 he was demoted to a post in the city’s animal shelter as new leadership attempted to move toward a community policing model and reign in cops known for targeting residents of color.

In 2009, after years of intensified profiling and harassment of Latinos under Gallo’s leadership, the East Haven Police made the mistake of broadening their assault and arresting a local Catholic priest–a white man named Father James Manship–as he tried to record a group of police officers as they harassed the owners of My Country Store.

The arrest made headlines like nothing in the town had since Malik Jones was shot, and by September 2009, the Department of Justice had rolled into town to investigate.

Too Much Power

The police department under Gallo’s reign was out of control and beyond reproach. Firing a police chief is rarely easy, even for a mayor with the will to do so. In 2010, after the DOJ investigation began, then Mayor April Capone put Gallo on leave while the investigation proceeded. Capone wanted to fire Gallo but could not, according to a source close to city government who asked not to be named. “To fire a police chief is next to impossible,” said the source. “The just-cause statute and the union power is so tight and so strong that a mayor just can’t do it.”

In October 2010, pressure on the department grew when a Yale University Law School clinic filed a civil rights action on behalf of Manship, the two owners of My Country Store and seven other Latino plaintiffs who claimed to have been the victims of the East Haven Police Department’s abuse. The complaint lists as defendants the East Haven Police Department and two fifths of its active duty cops.

The Yale complaint paints a frightful picture of the police department that’s echoed by residents who live there. In one March 2009 incident described in the complaint, the same officer who regularly harassed customers at My Country Store pulled over four Latino men as they drove them down Main Street on their way to La Bamba’s.

According to the complaint, that officer screamed slurs at the men, pulled them from their car and with the help of another officer arrested them. When they arrived at the police station, one of the men asked why he’d been arrested and an officer replied by spraying him in the face with mace. The officer then proceeded to open the back door of the cruiser and punch the now blinded man in the face repeatedly as he pulled him to a cell. According to the police report, at least three other officers watched as the man was brutalized.

Later that night, the Yale complaint says, three of the arrested men overheard the police beating the fourth man. The three others feared they would be next.

On December 19, 2011, the Department of Justice released the findings of its two-year civil and criminal investigation of “allegations that EHPD officers engage in biased policing, unconstitutional searches and seizures, and the use of excessive force.”

The DOJ documented officers targeting Latino-owned businesses and issuing Latino drivers tickets disproportionately, often roughing them up before falsifying police reports to cover up police violence.

The federal investigation also expressed concerns that East Haven police were inappropriately enforcing immigration laws by inquiring into the immigration status of non-citizens and reporting them to federal immigration authorities without the legal authority to do so.

The East Haven Police Department “does not have an agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement,” the report states. But nonetheless, the department “allowed its officers to engage in haphazard and uncoordinated immigration enforcement efforts to target Latino drivers for traffic stops … [as a] means for EHPD officers to harass and intimidate the Latino community.”

On January 18, a grand jury indicted four East Haven officers for conspiring to “injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate various members of the East Haven community” and for use of “unreasonable force.”

All four men face jail sentences of over 10 years if found guilty.

Retiring police chief Gallo was not yet charged criminally by the feds, but at a press conference on Monday, his attorney admitted that his client is “Co-Conspirator 1″ in the indictment and may face charges.

“My sense from the community is that there is a sense of vindication, that we have been listened to,” said Father Manship after he finished Mass on Sunday for the 800 Latino congregants of his church in nearby Fair Haven. “But nobody thinks this is over with.”

A Widespread Problem

Though the DOJ makes clear that the East Haven police abused their powers in enforcing immigration law, neither the federal indictment nor the Yale complaint address the impact of those efforts.

Even if East Haven’s lawlessness is fixed, questions remain that go far beyond its city limits. According to a number of advocates and attorneys in the East Haven area, the issue was not just that the local cops wanted to deport immigrants; it’s that federal immigration authorities obliged them, even as the DOJ was investigating the East Haven police.

John Lugo, an organizer with the New Haven group Unidad Latina en Accion told Colorlines.com that several of the group’s members and many others have been deported as a result of East Haven’s racist policing.

Michael Boyle, an attorney who practices immigration law in nearby North Haven, says that in the last couple of years he’s seen a number of immigrants who’ve been arrested by the East Haven police and then sent into deportation proceedings.

“ICE says it has more of a focus on people with criminal problems,” says Boyle, “but then the question is what kind of problems result in a call to ICE. In a place like East Haven, everything gets called in.”

And in a place like East Haven, virtually every Latino Colorlines.com interviewed had been profiled or arrested.

In July 2011, almost two years after the DOJ began investigating, Boyle says a young Ecuadoran man came into his office for immigration help. He’d been pulled over by the East Haven police and arrested for driving without proper registration. “The police called ICE and the next morning ICE showed up and told him he’d have to appear in immigration court.”

“It was one of these cases where he’d been staked out by the police at an Ecuadorian bakery. He was a really nice young man with a U.S.-citizen wife and he was targeted by the police there.”

Boyle decided to send the case over to the Yale law clinic, thinking that the man had been a victim of the very practices the clinic was litigating.

Ultimately, according to Boyle, the clinic succeeded in getting the man relief from deportation. “But,” he said, “had I taken the case and done the normal stuff without the civil rights claim, he’d be back in Mexico now.”

Another local immigration attorney, Glenn Formica, said he’d had a couple of cases from East Haven that resulted in deportation. Formica argued that even when ICE did not respond to calls from the East Haven Police over people picked up for simple traffic violations, the local police know what to charge immigrants with so that ICE will respond.

“Five years ago the cops in the area didn’t really think much about getting people deported,” said Formica. But as the federal government shifted its enforcement tactics to target local jails, “police departments that want to get people deported can do so pretty easily.”

“All you have to do is charge someone with the right thing. The East Haven police learned what to charge people with to get them deported.”

On Wednesday, clergy members in the East Haven area, including Father Manship, held a press conference to demand that the Connecticut state attorney make a full review of all convictions in the last four years based on arrests by the indicted East Haven officers. The clergy argue that any arrest colored by racial profiling or discrimination should be immediately vacated.

Yet some of those who were pegged with these convictions based on tainted arrests have already been deported.

According to John Lugo and some of the men gathered in La Bamba’s, ICE has just recently stopped picking people up from the East Haven Jail.

ICE did not answer Colorlines.com’s specific questions about whether the agency has continued to deport people from East Haven. An ICE spokesperson responded with the statement, “The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) take allegations of racial profiling and other complaints relating to civil rights and civil liberties violations very seriously.”

ICE may have backed off of East Haven in recent months–as it did in Maricopa County, Ariz. following the DOJ’s investigation of civil rights violations there–but what about the agency’s cooperation with the East Haven cops before the DOJ issued it’s report? And, in towns and cities around the country where local police are wise enough to avoid arresting social justice minded Catholic priests and therefore avoid federal investigation, it’s unlikely that ICE has any way to ensure it’s not deporting the victims of racial profiling and police misconduct.

ICE is rapidly expanding programs that use local police to enforce immigration laws. Mostly significantly, the Secure Communities program, which the Obama administration says will be fully operational in every jail around the country by 2013, automatically checks the immigration status of anyone booked by local police. The government claims that the program avoids racial profiling because it’s simply checking the immigration status of those already booked into jail. But that may be precisely the problem: the automated immigration check system can’t discern who is and who is not a victim of racial profiling.

Nearby New Haven has joined a growing cohort of counties and cities around the country who want to opt-out of the Secure Communities program. Mayor John DeStefano has warned that Secure Communities will undermine trust between local residents and the police. He and other city leaders have asked that ICE not implement the program in their city.

But the federal government has repeatedly said that localities can’t opt out. The result will be that every emerging Gallo, every East Haven police department, will now find it even easier to push their de jour undesirables into deportation.

If you think investigative stories like this are important, please donate today to support Colorlines.com.

Muslim Americans to NYPD: Enough Already, the Commish Must Go

0
Muslim Americans to NYPD: Enough Already, the Commish Must Go

On Tuesday the New York Times reported that the New York Police Department showed nearly 1,500 of its officers “The Third Jihad,” a 72-minute documentary that casts Muslim Americans as ubiquitously engaged in “a strategy to infiltrate and dominate America.” It was the latest item in a growing list of revelations about the NYPD’s profiling and surveillance of Muslim Americans, and now it has prompted demands that the police commissioner, one of the city’s most powerful public figures, immediately step down.

Dozens of community and religious leaders gathered on the steps of City Hall Thursday to call for the immediate resignation of both the commissioner and his top spokesperson. The Muslim American Civil Liberties Coalition convened the press conference following reports that NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly and spokesperson Paul Browne had lied about the police department’s use of the video, which depicts Muslim Americans as “homegrown terrorists.”

“Not only did the NYPD show this film to 1,500 officers, but Commissioner Kelly participated in its making,” said Amna Akbar, a member of the Civil Liberties Coalition and a law professor at the City University of New York. “But it does not stop there, either. Commissioner Kelly lied about his part in the production of that film.”

Last year, the Village Voice’s Tom Robbins broke the story about the video. A police officer who viewed the film during a training session told Robbins, “It just made Muslims look like the enemy. It was straight propaganda.”

Kelly appears in an interview for under a minute in the 72-minute film.

After Muslim community leaders objected to the video’s use last year, Kelly responded in a March 2011 letter, noting that the NYPD “did not participate in the production and we do not believe the content is appropriate for training purposes.”

But on Tuesday, the Times revealed that the video had been aired widely and that the commissioner and his spokesperson had in fact agreed to participate in its production.

On Wednesday, NYPD spokesperson Browne said that in 2007, after the film’s producers approached him, he recommended that Kelly sit down for an interview.

“I agreed, and regret that, considering I thought that somebody with those credentials would have produced a more objective production and that turned out not to be the case,” Browne told WNYC.

The film was financed and produced by a right wing, Zionist organization called the Clarion Fund, which has produced a number of Islamophobic films that have been widely distributed. During the 2008 presidential election, Clarion funded the production of an anti-Muslim film that it then mailed to millions of swing state voters to raise support for John McCain’s candidacy. One of the Fund’s major donors is Sheldon Adelson, who recently poured millions of dollars into a super PAC that backs Newt Gingrich.

Kelly gave a 90-minute interview to the film’s producers. In several minutes of that footage posted online by the producers, Kelly noted that operatives connected to Iran and Hezbollah pose a threat to the city. “Hezbollah is a formidable group, there’s no question about that. Do they have a presence here in this country? We have to assume that they do.”

The narrator of “The Third Jihad,” who claims to be a lone, moderate Muslim who was “outcast by the Islamic leadership across the country” opens the film warning of a homegrown movement of Muslims who will commit acts of terrorism and impose sharia law on the United States.

“We all know about terrorism,” the narrator says. “This is a war you don’t know about.”

The film is rife with ominous images of Muslim men burning American flags, Hezbollah rocket fire, sensational clips from Fox News and claims of terrorist sympathies among leading Muslim American advocates and civil rights groups based solely on guilt by association.

In addition to calling for Kelly and Browne to resign, the Muslim American Civil Liberties Coalition is also calling for the NYPD to retrain the police officers who viewed the film and for the City Council to institute an independent community oversight mechanism to place a check on the NYPD’s practices.

Apologies, But No Changes

Mayor Bloomberg defended his top cop on Thursday.

“Commissioner Kelly should not step down. I think it’s fair to say that it was a little bit of an embarrassment that this film was made,” said Bloomberg, WNYC reported.

Bloomberg also said he would not support the retraining of officers or additional oversight of the police department.

Instead of action, on Wednesday Commissioner Kelly issued a tepid apology.

“I offer my apologies to members of the Muslim community,” Kelly wrote in a statement.

“While it never became part of the Department’s curriculum,” he wrote, “and was not authorized for any training, regrettably it was shown in a room where officers … view it over an extended period in 2010.”

A number of City Council members spoke at the press conference as well. Jumaane Williams, a Council member from Brooklyn called for Browne’s immediate resignation, though stopped short of demanding Kelly’s ouster.

“There are too many instances where he has blatantly lied about what is going on with the NYPD to the tax payers to pay his salary,” Williams said of Browne. “If the mayor and the commissioner will not hold [Browne] accountable–will not hold themselves accountable– then perhaps it’s time for them to go as well.”

Last year Council member Williams was the target of the NYPD’s racial profiling practices when he was arrested without cause while trying to enter an event at the Brooklyn Museum, during Brooklyn’s annual West Indian Day Parade. At the time of his arrest, Williams was wearing a Council member’s pin on his lapel.

After Thursday’s press conference Williams told Colorlines.com, “There’s only so much disrespect and feeling like someone’s in your community to hurt you and harm you—and you’re paying these people to do it; you feel under siege–there’s only so much you can take of that.”

Profiling’s Familiar to Muslim New Yorkers

The revelations about “The Third Jihad” come as little surprise to many in the Muslim community in New York, who have been the targets of growing surveillance and infiltration by the NYPD.

Last year, The Associated Press reported that the NYPD has been engaged since 9/11 in systemic practices of surveillance, infiltration and “mapping” of Muslim communities. According to an August 2011 AP investigation:

undercover officers, known as “rakers,” [are sent] into minority neighborhoods as part of a human mapping program, according to officials directly involved in the program. They’ve monitored daily life in bookstores, bars, cafes and nightclubs. Police have also used informants, known as “mosque crawlers,” to monitor sermons, even when there’s no evidence of wrongdoing.

The NYPD has also made extensive use of informants who infiltrate communities. The AP reported:

[The NYPD] dispatched more officers to Pakistani neighborhoods and, according to one former police official directly involved in the effort, instructed them to look for reasons to stop cars: speeding, broken tail lights, running stop signs, whatever. The traffic stop gave police an opportunity to search for outstanding warrants or look for suspicious behavior. An arrest could be the leverage the police needed to persuade someone to become an informant.

The informants’ activities have led to convictions. But it has become increasingly clear that these convictions are based on practices that amount to entrapment. In many cases, the terrorism plots would never have existed were it not for the work of the informants, who often presented fake plots to vulnerable young men with no previous connections to terrorist organizations. When the men agreed to participate, often in secondary roles and with trepidation, they were arrested and the NYPD and federal officials claimed victory in foiling the attacks they dreamed up in the first place.

On Thursday, Akbar explained that the press conference had been called “not just because of the recent revelations of their involvement with ‘The Third Jihad’. It’s because a number of actions they’ve taken and the approach their department has taken to policing our communities–to infiltrating them and to treating us like we’re suspects when we’re just living our lives day to day.”

Gingrich Surges With Old, Familiar Ploy: Racist Attacks on Poor People

0
Gingrich Surges With Old, Familiar Ploy: Racist Attacks on Poor People

Newt Gingrich looks to be winning the race-baiting competition this Republican primary season. Fueled by a new version of his well honed attacks on the safety net, Gingrich celebrated Martin Luther King Day on Monday by restating what has become a staple of his stump speeches, calling President Obama the “best food stamp president in American history.”

The remark came, this time, after debate moderator Juan Williams asked if Gingrich’s campaign-trail suggestion that poor students be given jobs as janitors might me “viewed at a minimum insulting to all Americans, but as particularly to African Americans?” “The fact is that more people have been put on food stamps by Barrack Obama than any president in American history,” Gingrich said before an audience that erupted into vociferous applause.

Gingrich argues that the reason so many people are on food stamps is not that the economy has thrown millions into poverty, but rather that lazy black families are getting on the dole and don’t want to work. Earlier this month, Gingrich told an audience in New Hampshire, “If the NAACP invites me, I’ll go to their convention and talk about why the African-American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps.”

Gingrich’s attack on the food stamp program is not surprising; it’s the kind of politics that he’s been helping to perfect for over 30 years. He’s been waging the conservative counterrevolution against economic justice for a generation, using whatever Southern Strategy relics he can get his hands on.

For two decades, Gingrich and the GOP, often with the support of Democrats, have torn to shreds many of the New Deal and Great Society era programs that kept poor folks from total destitution–and that specifically sought to close the racial gaps in economic opportunity that black children inherit from generations of American apartheid. The conservative assault on these programs has often come with racially loaded caricatures of benefit recipients as lazy, greedy and criminal.

Yet, the food stamp program is among the last functional parts of the nation’s economic safety net. Food assistance has actually expanded to meet growing need.

The program, now officially called the Supplemental Food Assistance Program, serves 46 million Americans, 13 million more than in January 2009 when Obama took office. While cash assistance, Section 8 housing assistance and other programs have been slashed close to death, food stamps have held on and expanded thanks to an infusion from the stimulus package. For many families, it’s now the only thing that’s stopping hard times from turning into total catastrophe.

As I reported at the beginning of the recession, some families who can’t access cash assistance or unemployment insurance because of restrictions on those programs are now living on food stamps alone.

The program was spared from attack for a time, as more Americans signed up for help. The New York Times reported in late 2009 that as food stamp enrollment grew and families applied for help who’d never sought assistance before, the stigma that was once thrust upon the program had cleared.

But the Republican Party is not known to let a functioning safety net program function, especially when demonizing it can help them win elections. So Gingrich and other GOP hopefuls have set food stamps in their sights, doing all they can to infuse the program with the kind of racialized stigma that’s taken down other core safety-net programs. From a campaigning point of view, the strategy appears to be working. Gingrich’s South Carolina polling numbers jumped following his latest race-baiting foray, bringing him within striking distance of Mitt Romney.

Gingrich is not the only Republican candidate who’s attacked the food stamp program, though. Ron Paul, of course, would decimate all government safety-net programs. And even more troubling, front-runner Romney said during a New Hampshire primary debate, “I’d cut programs, a whole series of programs … return to states a whole series of programs, food stamps, housing vouchers, Medicaid…”

When Gingrich and President Bill Clinton passed the welfare reform bill in 1996, the federal income assistance program was devolved to the states and ceased to be an entitlement. Suddenly, very poor families were not entitled to income support and those who could access the program were subject to sanctions and work requirements that made it hard to stay on the rolls, and even harder to use the support to get out of poverty. States chopped the welfare program, now called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, by the millions and imposed draconian restrictions, including time limits that cut families off of assistance after as little as 21 or 24 months.

The result of all of this: Welfare rolls plunged, but poverty did not. And low-income women were left without any buffer in a low-wage economy that simply does not pay enough to support a family.

Like Romney, Rick Santorum wants to subject food stamps to similar reforms.

“Food stamps is another place, we gotta block grant it and send it back to the states just like I did on welfare reform… require work, and you put a time limit on it,” Santorum said.

These are ideas that Gingrich as been spreading since he was first elected to office in 1979. In fact, Santorum once called himself “a disciple” of Gingrich.

For those true believers in trickle-down economics (who unfortunately populate all of the Republican party and much of the Democratic one), unemployment can’t be addressed by fixing a broken economy. For Gingrich and friends, since the free market is fundamentally sound, the explanation for high unemployment must be that the workers don’t want or don’t know how to work.

Incidentally, the majority of the 46 million people who rely on the food stamp program are actually seniors of retirement age and kids, not working age people. Which leads to the next piece of the Gingrich plan to fight so-called food stamp dependency and willful unemployment: put 11-year-old kids to work.

Gingrich told a crowd at a December fundraiser that “really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and nobody around them who works.” He said that the solution to joblessness and poverty could be to “hire 30-some kids to work … for the price of one janitor.” So Gingrich would solve the jobs crisis by compelling middle school children to clean their schools.

Newt Gingrich has done as much to wreck the federal safety net and translate the Southern Strategy into the post-racial era as anyone in Washington. His chances of gaining the Republican nomination are slim, but the war against poor people that Gingrich has lead is well entrenched. Regardless of who wins the GOP nomination, Gingrich’s legacy will carry on.

The Israel Lobby Finds a New Face: Black College Students

0
The Israel Lobby Finds a New Face: Black College Students

When Vincent Evans arrived as a bright-eyed first-year at Florida A&M, the country’s largest historically black university, he knew he wanted to get involved in politics. So when an older student leader approached him one afternoon after a student government meeting to ask if he wanted an all expenses paid trip to D.C., Evans jumped at the opportunity.

The trip, it turned out, was sponsored by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, the country’s most powerful pro-Israel lobbying outfit. Israel is under growing attack from Palestinian and international activists who call the country a racist apartheid state. In response, its staunchest U.S. lobby is recruiting black students as moral shields to make the case for Israeli impunity. At historically black colleges and universities (known as HBCU’s) around the country, AIPAC is finding and developing a cadre of black allies to declare there’s no way Israel can be racist.

In his four years in college, Evans traveled to D.C. at least 10 times on AIPAC’s dime. He and a small group of other student leaders from his school joined hundreds of others from around the country, including other HBCU students, for AIPAC’s semi-annual Saban Leadership Seminar.

“Within the program,” says Evans, “they make a concerted effort to reach out to HBCU and majority Hispanic schools.”

Before he went to D.C., Evans knew nothing about Israel and had no opinions on Middle East politics. “The program starts at a layman’s level and takes you through what the current Middle East peace talks are about,” he recalls.

AIPAC trained Evans and other students in lobbying and campaign work and provided a crash course in its staunchly Zionist version of Middle East history and politics. Participants are introduced to American and Israeli political leaders and spend afternoons walking Capitol Hill to lobby for Israel.

It seemed to Evans an opportunity of a lifetime.

“You’re talking about a lot of students who grew up in a socio-economic place that does not give them these opportunities,” said Evans. “We met amazing people. I met Netanyahu. In 2007 or 2008 I met all the Democratic candidates for president. My dad cried when I met Obama. [AIPAC] opens your eyes to things you’ve never seen.”

In many ways, training HBCU students simply broadens the base of supporters of Israel. The students are sent back to their campuses where they’re expected to continue their pro-Israel advocacy. But targeting black students appears to have a particular utility for AIPAC.

Last year, AIPAC featured several HBCU students as speakers at its 5,000-person national policy conference in D.C. On stage, one student explained that she and a group of other AIPAC-trained HBCU students launched an attack on the Palestinian rights movement.

Specifically, they targeted Students For Justice in Palestine, a national student coalition with branches on a growing number of campuses. SJP frames its work as a struggle against Israeli apartheid. The group is fashioned on the model of the movement against South African apartheid that swept American universities in the 1980s. Like its predecessor, the growing international movement against Israeli apartheid calls for institutional and individual divestment from, boycott of and sanction against the Israeli government.

It’s a movement that prominent South African leaders, including Bishop Desmond Tutu , have put their weight behind. And American racial justice activists are increasingly joining the movement against Israeli occupation of Palestine.

Edna Bonhomme, a graduate student at Princeton University who is active in Palestine solidarity activism and was previously a member of SJP at Columbia University, explains the thinking:

“If you look at South Africa, there were differential sets of laws for people of different races in education, jobs, housing, for example. Having a differentiated and unequal legal system where racial origin differentiates people is apartheid. In Israel and the Occupied Territories the legal structure is that Arab residents have different rights than Jewish residents. It’s an apartheid structure.”

For AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups, the claims of Israeli state racism threaten any moral claim Israel tries to maintain. AIPAC has cultivated young black voices from black universities who are now taking the front line in repelling accusations of apartheid.

On stage at last year’s AIPAC conference, an HBCU student waxed indignant.

“How dare they use a word that has historic meaning for me,” said the speaker, to the loud cheers of the audience. “A word that conjures up some of the worst injustices an individual can suffer.” As she spoke, positioning herself as an arbiter of what gets to be called racist, a slide of an apartheid-era South African sign reading “White Area” appeared behind her.

Another speaker followed explaining that in early 2011, a group of students from Atlanta HBCU campuses who identified themselves as the Vanguard Leadership Group had drafted and published a letter in newspapers on campuses where SJP groups had recently scheduled anti-apartheid actions.

The Vanguard Leadership Group, which identifies itself on its website as a “leadership development academy and honor society for top students at the nation’s historically black colleges and universities” did not respond to Colorlines.com’s questions. AIPAC would not speak on the record. But Vincent Evans, who signed the letter, says that the Vanguard Leadership Group members “had all been through the Saban training. AIPAC uses Vanguard as their student cadre for the Atlanta schools.”

Rattling off a view of Israel mirroring AIPAC’s talking points, the Vanguard Leadership Group student explained to the conference that the letter “call[ed] out Students for Justice in Palestine… for mischaracterizing the one state in the Middle East that treats its citizens and its adversaries with care and concern. Whose army works under strict code of conduct… A country whose laws of democratic government ensure the rights of every man woman and child.”

The speaker claimed the letter appeared in a dozen student papers around the country.

According to Tanya Keilani, a Students for Justice in Palestine member at Columbia University, the letter was a sign of the anti-apartheid movement’s impact.

“It’s clear the word apartheid unsettles AIPAC and they’re trying to delegitimize our movement,” Keilani said. “Connecting Palestinians with any group and struggle that has any legitimacy in the US–like the black civil rights movement and the anti-apartheid movement–has a particular resonance and impact.”

Evans insists he “never felt with AIPAC that I was being used.” And the multiple trips he took to D.C. and the extensive political training he received paid off. After graduating from college in May 2011, Evans got a job working for the Democratic Party in Tallahassee.

His only regret about the involvement with AIPAC in college is that he could never fit into his schedule an AIPAC-organized trip to Israel, on which he could have met Israeli military leaders and members of the Knesset.

In late May of this year, according to AIPAC’s website, the organization will sponsor a trip to Israel for “allies,” including student leaders from historically black colleges and universities.

Dispatch From Detention: A Rare Look Inside Our ‘Humane’ Immigration Jails

0
Dispatch From Detention: A Rare Look Inside Our 'Humane' Immigration Jails

Sam Kitching, a soft-spoken, round old man dressed in civilian clothes who works for the Sheriff’s department at the Baker County Jail put his hand on my shoulder and, addressing me as “young man,” said, “It’s very important that you be careful in there. They might have AIDS and might try to grab your hand and push something into it.”

“AIDS?” I ask.

“They could,” he said. “These men can be dangerous.”

A younger man dressed in a tight, dark green Sheriff’s uniform unlatched the door into one of the pods that holds several dozen federal immigration detainees.

Mostly Latino and black and all dressed in orange jump suits, unzipped with the arms tied around waists, the men stood or sat at metal tables in groups of four or five in the three-sided concrete room.

“Zip up,” the guard yelled as the door opened.

The detainees pulled the jumpers up over their shoulders and I followed the guard, Kitching and a young Legal Aid attorney named Karen Winston into the pod. A man stood on a grated walkway in front of one of the two-bed jail cells where the detainees eat, sleep, bathe and go to the bathroom. The rest of the men were below in the concrete room where they pass all their time–there’s only one hour of recreation time in an enclosed gravel yard.

“Hey, Honduras, get down here,” Kitching yelled to the man on the platform, who walked down the grated metal stairs and joined three other Latino men talking in a corner.

“That’s what I do sometimes,” Kitching explained to me. “I call them by their country. For some reason if they’ve been here a while, I can remember their country.”

Winston, a recent law school graduate, works long days in the south Florida jail defending some of the close to 250 immigration detainees held there. On this Friday morning, she’d driven from Jacksonville, the closest city, to conduct a “know your rights” training for as many of the detainees as possible. She noted the training name is misleading, since detainees don’t have many rights to know of.

“I’m here to give a training on your legal rights. He’s here doing research,” she said, pointing at me. “He’ll tell you what it’s about.”

I gained access to the Baker County Jail and five other immigration detention centers as a researcher, working for Colorlines.com’s publisher, the Applied Research Center. ICE intermittently allows researchers from human rights groups to enter the facilities to interview detainees and check on conditions. Until recently, the facilities have been almost entirely closed and when I mention to immigration advocates that I’ve spent time in the jails, they look at me with bewilderment. The interiors of detention centers might as well be black sites, cast off the political map except for the rare instances of abuse so egregious that they blip onto our ethical radar.

detention_cetner2_0121.jpg

As Winston talked and answered a barrage of questions from the men who hoped to glean from her some crack in the legal walls that might lead them out, I sat down at one of the metal tables to listen. A short man named Jose left the group that had gathered around her and walked over to me. His right eye had a thick, white film covering it and the skin beneath was scarred. 

“I’ve heard all this, and there’s nothing to help me,” he said, in Spanish.

“I lost my eyesight in one eye,” he said. “In Krome,” a detention center in south Florida where he was held for months before he was moved to Baker, “they didn’t give me my meds for an infection. Now I can’t see anything from my right eye.”

Then Jose pulled down the collar of his t-shirt and showed me the long, raised scars on his chest.

“This is why I don’t want to go back to Mexico,” he said. “This is from torture in Mexico.”

He says that Mexican federal cops tortured him in a town near the border, as he made his way back to the United States. He had been picked up driving without a license in South Florida and deported over a year ago. The police thought he was a member of a drug cartel, but he says he’s just an immigrant who had lived in the U.S. for 14 years. When the beating and cutting was over, he was left on the side of a dusty road in the border town. After three days living on the street, he decided to try to cross again.

Jose reached his hand out to shake mine and I began to meet him. But then I stopped, pulling my arm back and look toward the door, where Kitching was sitting on a stool looking down at the floor.

“I can’t,” I said. “I’m sorry. He said I can’t shake hands,” and I felt the panic of guilt rise up in my stomach.

Jose pulled his hand back to his chest and rested it inside the open zipper of his jump suit, as if he was embracing himself. Another man who’d walked away from the legal training sat across from me.

“We are not bad people,” said the man, whose hair was parted handsomely to the side. He looked at his fingers. “It is the first time that I’ve had to bite my finger nails. It’s the first time I’ve ever had to do that, they wont even give us nail clippers. It’s demeaning,” he said, in English.

Immigration detention centers claim their share of criminal abuses–medical neglect like the kind that left Jose blind (120 people have died in detention centers since 2003) and rampant sexual assault by guards (records recently released to the ACLU document at least 200 allegations of abuse since 2007 alone). But for many detainees, the worst part of awaiting expulsion is not the acute trauma inflicted inside the jails. Most carry with them the unhealed wounds of violence from life on the outside that the humiliating baseness of life inside these jails reopens.

America’s immigration detention centers are in the business of warehousing men and women who have suffered trauma–the sorts of people whom reasonable governments should aim to protect, and indeed whom the U.S. has laws to protect. Instead, they are locked up, thrown into these legal purgatories and traded as pawns in a political and financial game.

The Business of Deportation

MacClenny, Fla., is the seat of Baker County. It’s mostly one street–a strip mall and a few mechanic shops, just under an hour’s drive from Jacksonville and 10 minutes through fields and forest to Georgia. There are about 6,000 people in MacClenny and the Baker County Jail is one of the largest employers in town.

The facility was built to foster growth. The county signed a contract with federal law enforcement agencies, mainly Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to hold their detainees. For ICE, MacClenny was perfectly located: not too close to a metropolitan center with a high density of advocates like Karen Winston, who make the work of deporting people more difficult, and an easy drive from Georgia, South Carolina and the rest of the Southeast, which has seen significant new immigration in the past decade.

Baker County, though, does not have an immigrant population–three quarters of its residents are white and almost all the rest are black. It’s only immigrant residents are among the people it warehouses, people who are shipped in from as far away as New York. Baker County Sheriff Joey Dobson, a Methodist according to the county’s website, brought the detention center to town. With booming rates of deportation during the George W. Bush administration, Dobson figured immigration detention was the place to look for revenue. So in 2009, Baker County opened a new jail to hold county inmates and ICE detainees.

But as the year progressed, ICE had not produced the 400 detainees county officials expected. So most of the nearly 100 promised hires–guards, medical and support staff–hadn’t materialized and some of those who were hired in anticipation of the inflow of federal detainees were laid off. The facility wasn’t pulling in the $85 per day that ICE would have paid for each detainee and the jail was running at a loss. Worse, that meant the county was forced to pay a lot more for each of its own inmates, to make payments on the $45 million bond debt issued to build the facility.

This was 2009, a bad time for public officials in small conservative towns to look like they’d carelessly wasted money. In a public meeting on the budget, a local man piped up on the matter.

“The Tea Party is saying be prudent men,” he began, identifying his affiliation as he addressed the commissioners. “We hope and pray for the best, a lot of us are Christians and we are praying for Sheriff Dobson and the BCDC facility, we want it to be a success and we are doing all we can to ask All Mighty God to support that venture.”

A feasibility study by a private firm contracted by the county in 2007 had warned that although immigration was likely to continue and immigration enforcement was growing in intensity, the need for more detention space is ultimately vulnerable to policy shifts. “Relaxation of immigration laws could substantially reduce the workload of ICE,” the study noted.

But President Obama has come through for Baker County. The Obama administration has deported more people in each of its first three years than any previous year–almost 1.2 million in the last three years–and it needs more space to lock those people up. The detention business is now booming and the companies and counties seeking profit off its expansion are no longer worried.

In January 2010, Dobson, a tall neckless, middle-aged man, stood before the Baker County commissioners to announce progress.

“We got 98 additional ICE inmates last night,” he said.

“We are no different from all these other companies that are struggling,” said Dobson, but, he added, the county was looking at “an additional opportunity to bring overcrowding to this facility.”

In the next year, the sheriff hired a slew of new corrections officers and other staff.

Immigration detention is the most rapidly expanding segment of the American prison system. The 2012 federal appropriations bill allocated over $2 billion for detention, several million more than the year before, and since 2009, ICE has entered into agreements to build or expand at least 10 detention facilities.

Much of the growing budget for detention is paid in rent to municipal governments and to the private prison companies–the industry grosses about $5 billion annually–that operate most of the system’s nearly 34,000 detention beds.

Waiting for the Unknown

At noon, Kitching passed Winston and I off to another guard at the jail, a short man with a blond crew cut who took us to the women’s pod. “It’s a pretty good job,” he said, as the door-control room buzzed us through. “It was hard to make a living here.”

“Things are calm,” said the guard. “Except the Haitians and Cubans don’t seem to like each other. The females are like cats, scratching at each other, fighting all the time. They act like my daughters. We have to tear them off each other.”

detention_family_0112.jpgUnlike people held on criminal charges, immigrant detainees are not afforded the Sixth Amendment right to legal counsel. Since deportation is not formally considered a punishment, but an administrative consequence for violating a civil law–crossing the border–they have no right to an attorney. Only 16 percent of detainees have legal representation. For most of the detained, presentations like Winston’s are the only legal advice they get; despite their designation as “illegal” in our political lexicon, in the legal system they retain few of the rights that we expect of the criminal justice system.

Inside the pod, the guard yelled at the women to quiet down. I sat down to talk with Julie, a British woman who’d been in the detention center for seven months because of a drug charge. She’s lived in the country for 20 years.

A guard opened the door and yelled Julie’s name. She looked up and smiled. She was being released. Winston, who’d taken her case, had argued in immigration court for her release on humanitarian grounds since Julie was the sole caregiver of her 7-year-old daughter. The girl was in foster care.

Julie slid off the bench and rushed into her cell to begin collecting her things, a stack of papers and some pictures of her daughter. The other women watched Julie as she left. One of them, a young black woman with tight cornrows and a baby face yelled after her. “Bye Julie, good luck with everything, okay.”

Julie barely slowed to respond, waving as she rushed out of the door.

The young black woman came to the table and sat down.

“She’s going to see her baby,” she said. “I want to see mine so bad.”

In a southern accent, she told me that she had to leave her 1-year-old baby with her mom near Miami. She and her boyfriend, the baby’s father, were both arrested after stealing clothes from a mall. Her appointed public defender, a private attorney with a state contract, told her to take a plea to get a lower sentence. The lawyer failed to tell her that the plea would result in detention and likely deportation.

She now awaits deportation to Haiti–a place she has never been. She was born in the Bahamas to Haitian parents and the Bahamian government does not consider her a citizen. The Haitians do. She came to the U.S. before her first birthday and has no remaining family in Haiti, nor did she ever learn to speak Creole. If she’s deported, she does not expect to see her baby again.

A recent investigation by the [Florida Center for Investigative Reporting found](http://fcir.org/2011/11/13/u-s-deportees-to-haiti-jailed-without-cause-face-severe-health-risks/) that people deported to Haiti are incarcerated again when they land in the country–held in squalid jails where they have no access to clean water and risk contracting Cholera, but are denied access to medical care.

When I left the Baker detention center that afternoon, Julie was walking toward the building from the empty parking lot. She’d taken the cash from the box that held all the clothes and other possessions with which she’d arrived and asked the receptionist at the front of the jail where to find a cigarette. Leaning against one of the columns at the entrance of the jail, she lit one of the Winstons as she waited for a once-a-day shuttle bus to Jacksonville. From there, she planned take a bus to Fort Lauderdale where her daughter lives.

“Seven months and then they let me out,” she said. “Seems sort of silly to me.”

ICE’s stated rationale for detaining so many people is to ensure that those who may be deported appear for their court dates and comply with their deportation orders. ICE argues that unless it detains people, nobody would actually show up to court. In many cases, it’s true that posed with a game of legal Russian roulette, many choose not to play; but others simply are not flight risks. For someone like Julie, her only concern for four months behind bars was returning to her daughter. The absconder argument doesn’t hold a lot of weight.

As she waited, Julie looked up at the clear sky. “This is the first time nobody’s been watching me in seven months,” she said, looking inside at the desk. “I don’t even remember what it’s like not to be watched.”

A Wide Dragnet

The Glades County Detention Center rises out of the Florida swamplands north of Miami. It was designed by the same firm that drafted the Baker facility and it’s set up in almost exactly the same way. When I visited Glades, two ICE officers and a sheriff’s deputy led me up a flight of stairs to an octagonal guard booth in the middle of the pods. The walls were lined with panes of one-directional glass, each of which provided a clear view of the pods below.

As we toured the facility, a woman in her cell was getting dressed and her bare back attracted the glances of the three men giving the tour. I averted my eyes to respect her privacy. Of course, there is never a moment when detainees are unwatched. Guards watch them from the invisibility of the tower. Even when the men are not standing there looking through the windows, a guard sits in the watchtower booth, eyes glued to the screens, each with images of the people below.

glades-300x154.jpgAt Glades, I wasn’t permitted to talk with people inside the pods. I was instead put in a small medical room and the women were brought there to talk with me. The woman who was changing was among them. Like most of the women, she’d been through hell to get to this purgatory. She’d lived for eight years with a man who she said she loved, but who beat her up.

“He’d get drunk and just beat me. I fought back and when he didn’t drink he was OK, but when he drank it was bad.”

Three months before I met her, she’d called the police. But she speaks no English and when the cops arrived, her U.S. citizen boyfriend talked to the them instead, telling the officers that she’d been the aggressor.

“He was very smooth with them,” she told me. “He could talk to them.”

The cops cuffed her along with the her abuser. He was released, but because she’s an undocumented immigrant, she got detained by ICE and ended up in Glades.

Federal law is supposed to protect victims of crimes and of domestic violence from deportation. Specific categories of immigration relief have been created by Congress to provide domestic violence victims and people who have been involuntarily trafficked into the U.S. But in my time in detention centers, I met many women who have been detained, often for extended periods, as a result of arrests that related to domestic violence or human trafficking. Some have been released since I met them, but others will be deported, and even those who are eventually let out can find that their lives are ruined.

The first woman I spoke to in Glades was a white South African woman who suffered from such acute symptoms of dissociation that for 15 second intervals in the middle of our conversation, she’d look off toward the door and her head would start shaking. When she’d come to, she had no idea what I’d said and I had to start over. Before she got to Glades, where she’d been detained for several months, the woman spent four months in jail on drug charges. She says the cops found a small bag of meth in her purse.

When she was arrested, she was pregnant. She went into labor while locked up in the jail and the hospital, where she was brought in chains, forced her to undergo a Caesarean section. She watched the nurse take her baby away.

When she could focus on our conversation, she told me she’d been in the U.S. for 15 years. She’d come following a man. They’d had children, but he soon left her and she was left without a job trying to make do. Her father and brothers are in the U.S. and she has no family in South Africa.

After half a dozen more interviews at Glades, I was told it’s time to leave. As we walked down the hallway toward the entrance, we passed a thick glass window on a door that looked out to a gravel yard. A torrent of rain smashed against it. The ICE officer, a short rounding black man with a thick Cajun accent, said that the detainees wouldn’t be going outside for their hour of rec time that day.

“It’ll make them restless to be in all day, but this rains not gonna stop for a while.”

Obama’s ‘Humane’ Reforms

In late 2009, the Obama administration announced plans to reform the detention system. The reforms included stated efforts to decrease the number of immigrants and asylum seekers held in penal jails or jail-like facilities, and to detain people closer to their homes by building new facilities near urban centers. The announcement also suggested that more people could be released or placed on supervision without being locked up, which is a more fiscally prudent option than mass detention. Yet, according to an October 2011 report by Human Rights First, about half of ICE detainees are still held in actual correctional facilities and most of the rest are held in jail-like facilities. Rather than expand alternatives to detention programs, ICE under Obama has moved to build more facilities, which it says will be “humane.”

ICE has made only a few forays into humane detention, but the agency boasts about them as models of reform. The T. Don Hutto Residential Center, as it’s called, is one of them. Hutto is behind the main street in Taylor, Texas, an hour north of Austin. It’s a small town with a mile-long downtown that’s filled with closed shops. Near the highway exit, a couple of shiny auto sales lots filled with trucks and a farm equipment retailer look like they’re doing well.

Passing through the metal detector at the front desk of Hutto, I sat down and waited for 30 seconds until a petite woman with blond highlights named Melissa came to collect me. Melissa spoke with a south Texas accent and worked for ICE at the facility, which is owned by the private Corrections Corporation of America. We were joined by the chief of security at Hutto, an employee of the CCA who wore jeans and a belt with shiny rhinestones on it.

According to Melissa and the chief of security, Hutto is not a jail. Like its name suggests, it’s a residential facility. I ask if the women can leave if they want to. “No. But the thing is, we help them get ready for life after they’re out of here. There’s even a volunteer work program. They get $1.50 a day for a four hour shift.”

It’s the first in a series of comments Melissa makes to paint Hutto as a rehabilitative facility. What its occupants are recovering from she does not say.

Until two years ago, Hutto was used to detain whole immigrant families, both parents and children. But advocates made a big enough fuss about locking up kids and that practice ended. Hutto didn’t close, though. It became a women’s detention center, and now there’s a large dirt patch in the yard where there used to be a jungle gym. Corrections Corporation of America, the for-profit company that owns Hutto and at least 13 other centers, donated the toys to the town of Taylor.

“It’s a nice environment here, it’s not punitive at all, no problems here, no cat scratching, nothing like that,” says the chief of security.

Melissa jumps in. “We have very stringent criteria: no drugs, no crime, many are here for illegal entry, the rest are asylum seekers.”

Indeed, Hutto is a softer place than the other detention centers. The women can wear their own clothes and as we walk down the halls, there are women walking in small groups without guards accompanying them.

Behind the main building where the detainees sleep in jail cells from which the locks have been removed, there’s a row of prefab trailers. Twelve women sat in plastic chairs in the back of one of them. They stared blankly ahead or looked down at the ground. A Corrections Corp. employee called them up one by one to a desk at the front of the trailer. The women slowly approached the desk and picked beads and long pieces of string from a plastic tub.

“You know the bracelets you sometimes see kids wearing. They can make those here and then send the bracelets to their kids,” said Melissa. “They get the beads by trading in fake money like monopoly money they earn through their English classes. The better they do on their English classes, the more beads they can buy. It’s an incentive to learn English.”

We walked to the back of the trailer where there was a shelf on which sat a pile of knitted blankets. There were three women knitting blankets out of artificial yarns in bright colors. “It’s amazing what they can do,” she said, as she smiled too big and looked at me for validation.

Melissa told me that they donate the crafts and the blankets to local foster kids. The research project that I was conducting at the time of these visits discovered that there are thousands of children stuck in foster care who can’t be reunified with their family because the mother or father is locked in detention or was deported. Almost all of these women are separated from their own children, and the detention center has them making gifts for the local foster children.

We went back into the main building and I was brought into a small glass booth in a larger room that’s used for visitation. Before Hutto was a family detention center, it was a jail and the room still had the windows that separated inmates from visitors. The windows had been covered in red curtains and the room filled with multi-colored chairs. A man and a woman sat on some of them talking. He’d come to visit his girlfriend, who was detained there. But when they touched each other’s hands, a guard in the room yelled at them. “No contact.”

If you think investigative stories like this are important, please donate today to support Colorlines.com.

The White House’s Flawed Attempt to Crack Down on Food Stamp ‘Fraud’

0
The White House's Flawed Attempt to Crack Down on Food Stamp 'Fraud'

This week, the White House announced a new plan to save a few federal dollars: a crack down on food stamp fraud. Over 46 million people rely on the federal food assistance program to eat, according to Agriculture Department statistics. For many families, it’s the only assistance they’re eligible for in the recession’s long slump. As with anything where money’s involved, it’s also vulnerable to fraud and rule-bending.

But food stamp fraud of the kind described by the administration is actually a very tricky tangle that can’t be reduced to good and bad recipients. And it’s a perfect example of how poor people get squeezed when Democrats and Republicans compete to slay the government-waste boogeyman.

The president and vice president on Monday rolled out a plan to “ensure program integrity …[to] make sure the program is targeted towards those families who need it the most.” The White House statement, which was released as part of the Obama administration’s “Campaign to Cut Waste,” noted that “fraud occurs relatively infrequently”–about a penny on every dollar of food assistance is used fraudulently–but that to protect taxpayers it is nonetheless important to go after misuse.

According to the Washington Post, the administration plans to target two types of food stamp fraud–retailer fraud and fraud committed by beneficiaries. On the retailer side this means penalizing grocery stores and bodegas from stealing people’s benefits by keeping their PIN numbers after beneficiaries use their government issued debit card to buy food. On the beneficiary side, the plan is to go after people who turn their benefits into cash. The Post describes this scenario:

… beneficiaries who receive monthly deposits of food aid on to plastic cards similar to bank cards intentionally use SNAP benefits to purchase water or other beverages with bottle deposits, dump the liquid and then obtain cash for bottle deposits.

The premise is that food assistance should only go to those who actually qualify, and that those who get it should only use it for their families and nobody should be making a profit off the federal program.

That all seems right, but it’s complicated.

A couple years ago, when the recession was still news, I wrote a Colorlines investigation on single moms struggling to make it. Mothers who’d been kicked off of cash assistance because of harsh welfare reform rules told me they now sell their food assistance at the corner bodega for 70 cents on the dollar, just to cover basics like utility bills and clothes for their kids.

One mom I met, a 28-year-old with two young girls who could not find a job and had been booted off cash assistance, had a choice each month when the benefits came in: trade the stamps for cash to pay rent or use the benefits solely for food and risk becoming homeless with her kids. That wasn’t much of a choice, but since she felt she could scrape by getting cans of food from soup kitchens and from friends, she decided she needed the cash and the roof over her head.

It’s hard to see how she and her family should be the target of an anti-fraud campaign.

The practices of retailers is a little more clear cut. Food stamp beneficiaries walk into a corner bodega, hand over their card and the bodega hands back about 70 cents on the dollar in cash. The stores make a profit and there’s little doubt that the practice is exploitative and fraudulent.

The food stamp program has expanded rapidly in the recession and in many way’s it’s been a huge success, putting food on the tables of tens of millions in the deepest recession most of us have ever lived through. It’s rarely noted though that for many families food stamps are often the only real assistance program left. With the welfare program in many states barely responding to growing recessionary need and unemployment insurance running out or never kicking in for many poor families, food assistance is all there is. Some recipients decide they have to use the benefits illegally to fill in the gaps left by our nation’s political choices.

According to the White House, last year, “investigations of individuals and retailers resulted in over 44,000 persons being disqualified from SNAP and 931 retailers being permanently barred from accepting benefits.” Going after exploitative retailer fraud may make some sense, but beneficiary fraud of the kind the White House is concerned with may be less a matter of fraud than it is an exercise in creative survival on the part of those doing the surviving.

Read Seth Freed Wessler’s original investigation, “Selling Food Stamps for Kids Shoes.”

Report: Half of Nation’s Undocumented Adults Have Kids

0
Report: Half of Nation's Undocumented Adults Have Kids

The Pew Hispanic Center released a new analysis last week that estimates nearly half of the 10.2 million adult undocumented immigrants in the United States are parents of children under 18, and almost two-thirds have lived here for at least a decade. The estimates follow Newt Gingrich’s recent announcement of support for a “path to legality” for undocumented immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for many years.

The estimates, which are based on the latest data from the U.S. Census Bureau, provide some significant context for the Applied Research Center’s recent report “Shattered Families,” that included never-before released government data showing the Obama administration deported nearly 46,000 parents of U.S.-citizen children between January and June of 2011. ARC secured the data through a Freedom of Information Act request.

ARC’s report also found that at least 5,100 children of detained and deported parents are currently stuck in foster care.

These new estimates from Pew help explain why the Obama Administration’s historic levels of deportation — almost 400,000 people removed in the last fiscal year — have resulted in such troubling collateral effects despite an official government commitment to family unity.

With orders to continue deporting hundreds of thousands of non-citizens, the federal immigration agency increasingly focuses its attention on the places where they can find bodies. As rates of new immigration to the United States fall, this means going after the increasing number of long-term residents of the United States, often in cities and towns far from the border.

Secure Communities, a federal program that checks the immigration status of everyone booked into a local jail and is responsible for a growing proportion of deportations, operates aggressively in communities in the interior of the United States. The program rounds up noncitizens who have lived in the United States for decades and have deep ties to their communities because it focuses on anyone who’s come into contact with local police for any reason, rather than on those who have recently entered the country.

The Pew study estimates that over a third of undocumented adult immigrants have lived in the U.S. for 15 years or more, a share that has doubled since 2000. Relatedly, the share undocumented adults who have lived in the U.S. less than five years fell by half since 2000.

Few doubt that by continuing to deport hundreds of thousands of noncitizens, the federal government will continue to inflict irreparable damages. Many of the thousands of children in foster care with deported parents will never see their mother or father again.

Georgia Immigrant Couple Fights to Regain Custody of Kids

0
Georgia Immigrant Couple Fights to Regain Custody of Kids

Ovidio and Domitina Mendez’s lost their five children to foster care when the Georgia Department of Family and Children Services arrived at their home claimed the kids were malnourished. The couple, who are both undocumented immigrants from Guatemala, says they did everything the child welfare agency asked them to do to get their kids back. But three years later, the children are still in foster care with strangers. Why? Because they are undocumented immigrants who speak Spanish, according to advocates.

In June, a juvenile court in Whitfield County, Georgia ruled to terminate the Mendez’s parental rights. The children have been placed with a foster family that now wants to adopt them, according to a report by the Times Free Press.

According to the family and to advocates in Georgia, the Mendez family are the victims of a biased child welfare system that denies undocumented and non-English speaking mothers and fathers their parental rights.

A hearing to have their case re-opened has been scheduled for Thursday.

The case illuminates a number of the findings of a report published earlier this month by the Applied Research Center and Colorlines.com. “Shattered Families,” the first national investigation on the intersection of immigration enforcement and child welfare found that there are at least 5,100 children currently in foster whose parents have been detained or deported. These families often face insurmountable barriers to reunification.

The ARC investigation also found that undocumented parents face bias in the child welfare system, even when parents are not detained or deported. This is partially a result of cultural and language discrimination against immigrant parents. The Times Free Press reports:

Questions about English came quickly during the June termination-of-rights hearing, according to court documents. Then came questions about the parents’ immigration status.

“Describe for the court why even three years after [the children went into the state's custody] you cannot speak English without an interpreter,” Bruce Kling, special assistant attorney general for Whitfield County Department of Family and Children’s Services, said to Domitina Mendez.

“I cannot speak English, but I did — because I did not grow up speaking English,” she replied in Spanish through an interpreter.

Several of the children in the family are disabled and suffer from medical problems, and the child welfare department argued that the parents were not equipped to care for them. The county’s attorney argued, “We basically have two individuals with first- to second-grade educations and although they have the capacity to love and care for their children, they do not have the capacity to understand their immense medical needs to properly address them.”

But the facts of the case and the remainder of the court deliberations suggest that the court’s decision to terminate parental rights had more to do with the parents’ immigration status and language abilities than the children’s disabilities.

ARC’s research found that across the country, county child welfare department are failing to reunify families when parents are undocumented. Much like in the Georgia case, children are removed from their parents because of allegations of maltreatment, often related to poverty, but then remain in foster care because of barriers that undocumented mothers and fathers face in trying to regain custody.

A child welfare caseworker in Orlando, Florida, interviewed by ARC recalled the case of a mother of two U.S. citizens who could not regain custody because federal laws block undocumented immigrants from accessing many services.

“We removed the kids because of a dirty house issue, poverty basically…This has nothing to do with this woman maliciously abusing or neglecting her children but it was a situation where we did not feel safe reunifying with her because she does not have the means to get the services or help she needed. We ended up having to remove them from her.”

Similarly, ARC found that many county child welfare departments reason that because undocumented immigrants cannot attain driver’s licenses, they can not be trusted as caregivers for children.

In the Whitfield County case, the child welfare department raised this argument in their petition to terminate parental rights, saying that the parents would not be able to transport their children.

Though the couple completed the child welfare department’s reunification case plan tasks and even the children’s attorney believed that the family should have been reunified, the judge who presided over the case ruled to terminated their parental rights.

“It is the sad truth that neither of these parents will ever be able to meet the extreme special needs of these five children on a day-to-day basis,” the judge told the Times Free Press.

“They certainly love their children, but the children have not resided with them for three years…The children are in need of, and deserving of, a permanent home.”

On Thursday, Ovidio and Domitina Mendez go to court to argue that theirs should be this home. A  Change.org petition has been created in support of their case.

Obama: Kids Stuck in Foster Care Due to Deportation a ‘Real Problem’

0
Obama: Kids Stuck in Foster Care Due to Deportation a 'Real Problem'

In a briefing with Latino journalists last week, President Obama directly acknowledged that his administration’s immigration enforcement practices break up families and exclude parents from decisions about the custody of their children. His comments affirmed the central findings of a yearlong investigation by the Applied Research Center, which publishes Colorlines.com, released earlier this month. The investigation concludes that there are at least 5,100 children currently in foster care who are stuck there because their parents were detained or deported by immigration officials.

The president said parents should have access to their children if they are detained and that he has directed the Department of Homeland Security to examine its family unification practices to ensure that happens. The White House declined to comment today on the details of that examination or what policy changes it may produce.

But in his comments last week, the president said that there are administrative actions that the Department of Homeland Security can take to address the separation of families.

“I’m not here to pretend that this hasn’t happened,” said Obama, in response, according to a journalist present, to a question about the issues raised in the Applied Research Center investigation.

“I think we have to keep putting pressure on those responsible for administering the program, to make sure that children aren’t torn from their parents without due process and the possibility to stay with their children,” the president added, according to La Opinion’s report on the briefing.

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to request for comment on the president’s remarks, but a spokesperson for Immigration and Customs Enforcement said that the agency has reviewed the Applied Research Center investigation.

That investigation found that when mothers and fathers are detained and their children are in foster care, parents can do little to advocate for their families. In reviewing hundreds of individual cases, we found no parent who had been transported from detention to appear at the juvenile court hearings that determined their family’s future. Many could not even access their hearings by phone. We further learned that, once parents are deported, child welfare departments and juvenile courts often move to terminate parental rights, which clears a child for adoption.

Echoing these findings, the president said last week that parents “have to be able to make arrangements, so that the children can go with them or be left with relatives. I don’t think this is functioning perfectly now,” according to La Opinion’s report.

“It’s a real problem,” said the president. “I’ve instructed the Department of Homeland Security and all the agencies that as a basic principle, if parents are being deported, they have access to their kids.”

Ricardo, a father from Napa, Calif., who our researchers met inside an Arizona detention center in February, has been detained for almost a year while he awaits deportation. His 1- and 2-year-old babies are living in foster care with strangers.

Ricardo’s children were removed from his custody because a babysitter left them alone for less than an hour and a neighbor called the police. Ricardo, whose name has been changed, and his wife, a U.S. citizen, were arrested and convicted on misdemeanor child endangerment charges. But because he is an undocumented immigrant, rather than being released and quickly moving to regain custody of his children, his information was run through a federal database and ICE moved him to detention. His wife suffers from seizures and the county child welfare department refused to place their babies with her unless Ricardo was present to parent as well.

But Ricardo was not present because ICE had detained him and, despite the child welfare system’s mandate toward family reunification, his children have now been in foster care for close to a year. Ricardo has been fully excluded from family court proceedings because he is detained. His parental rights will soon be terminated, according to an immigration advocate familiar with the case.

The Applied Research Center estimates that another 15,000 children, at least, may be stuck in foster care and unable to reunify with their detained or deported parents over the next five years, if nothing changes.

Looking through the double-paned window of the visitation booth at the Pinal County Jail in Arizona, where he is detained, Ricardo said, “I love them like nothing else.”

In June, ICE announced that officers would be expected to use their discretion to weed out immigrants whom the administration considers low-priority for deportation, because they have not been convicted of a criminal charge. These include longtime residents of the United States and those with children.

But in interviews with Colorlines.com, immigration attorneys and advocates around the country say that they have not seen any significant increase in the use of ICE discretion to release parents. On Wednesday, the American Immigration Lawyers Association released a report that concluded “most ICE offices have not changed their practices since the issuance of these new directives.”

Even if the policy is implemented as the administration says it may be, many families are likely to be shattered, sometimes permanently, because of an expanding category of people who fit into ICE’s target population of “criminal alien.”

Tens of thousands are now prosecuted criminally and incarcerated each year for crossing back over the border after a previous deportation, often to rejoin their families or to appear in juvenile courts. ICE considers them part of the targeted group. Ricardo is also part of the targeted category, because his interaction with police over the endangerment charge automatically shifts him into ICE’s “criminal alien” category.

Meanwhile, a growing percentage of people deported during the Obama administration are parents of U.S.-citizen children. Data obtained by the Applied Research Center through a Freedom of Information Act request shows that from January to June of 2011, the U.S. deported over 46,000 parents of citizen kids. That’s about 22 percent of all deportees. In the 10-year period that preceded the Obama administration, just 8 percent of deportees were parents of U.S. citizens, according to previously released government data.

In response to questions about the separation of families at last week’s briefing, the president said, “We’re examining detention policy so that we can execute it in the most humane way possible. I think there’s a wide range of administrative measures we can take, not all of which are in progress now.”

U.S. Deports 46K Parents With Citizen Kids in Just Six Months

0
U.S. Deports 46K Parents With Citizen Kids in Just Six Months

Between January and June of 2011, the United States carried out more than 46,000 deportations of the parents of U.S.-citizen children, according to previously unreleased federal data obtained by Colorlines.com’s publisher, the Applied Research Center. The figures reflect a striking increase in the rate of removals of parents and raise serious concerns about the impact of these deportations on children, many of whom are left behind.

Congress demanded two years ago that the Department of Homeland Security begin to compile this data by July 2010, but it had not been made available to the public. The Applied Research Center obtained it through a Freedom of Information Act request.

The data on parental deportations does not reveal how many children each of these parents had, or whether their children remained in the U.S. or left with their mothers and fathers. However, the Applied Research Center has also found a disturbing number of children languishing in foster care and separated from their parents for long periods. After a year-long national investigation, we estimate there are at least 5,100 children in foster care who face barriers to family reunification because their mother or father is detained or deported. That number could reach as high as 15,000 in the next five years, at the current rate of growth.

The rising number of parental deportations has corresponded with an overall increase in immigration enforcement under the Obama administration; in fiscal year 2011, a record 397,000 people were deported. Yet parental deportation has also increased as a proportion of all removals. Between 1998 and 2007, the last period for which similar data is available, approximately 8 percent of almost 2.2 million removals were parents of U.S.-citizen children. The new data, released to the Applied Research Center in September, reveals that more than 22 percent of all people deported in the first half of this year were parents of citizen kids.

If rates of parental deportation remain steady in the year to come, the country will remove about as many parents in just two years as it did in the ten-year period ICE tracked previously. The number of children of non-citizens placed in the U.S. child welfare system will no doubt shoot up as well. Already, according to our research, one in 16 kids in Los Angeles’ child welfare system are the children of detained or deported parents. Certain jurisdictions on the U.S.-Mexico border and at least one Florida county included in our field research had even higher rates.

The Obama administration has accepted the deportation of parents as an acceptable consequence of its immigration enforcement policy. In an interview aired on PBS’ “Frontline” last month, Cecilia Munoz, the administration’s top advisor on immigration, said that unless Congress passes a comprehensive immigration reform bill to provide a path to lawful status for undocumented immigrants, the deportation of parents will continue.

“At the end of the day, when you have immigration law that’s broken and you have a community of 10 million, 11 million people living and working in the United States illegally, some of these things are going to happen,” said Munoz.

dpr_parents_deported.gif“Even if the law is executed with perfection, there will be parents separated from their children,” Munoz added. “It is a result of having a broken system of laws.”

The Obama administration has been clear that ICE holds vast power to determine who it will and will not detain and deport. In July, ICE director John Morton released a memo affirming that agents have discretion in enforcement decisions. The memo instructed agents to consider “whether the person has a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, child, or parent” when determining who to detain or deport.

Yet, Munoz’s comments and the data we’ve obtained suggest that indiscriminate deportation of parents may be an inevitable result of a rapidly growing immigration-enforcement juggernaut. It is less a matter of a broken system than of the Obama administration’s very intentional policy of deporting 400,000 people a year.

Parents Return to Find Their Kids

In October, the New York Times reported that almost half–48 percent–of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. arrived before 2000. Long-term residents, who are more likely to have children with U.S. citizenship, are increasingly the targets of federal immigration enforcement.

Indeed, the flow of immigrants crossing over the U.S.-Mexico border has declined in the last several years. And of the majority of the diminishing numbers of people still picked up crossing the border have already lived in the U.S. In 2010, 56 percent of people caught at the border had been deported before, up from 44 percent in 2005. Advocates say many of those who are returning are coming back to be with their children, who were left behind when they were deported.

These long-term residents of the U.S. are targeted by a federal deportation policy that relies increasingly on local police. A controversial program called Secure Communities, which has elicited protest from governors in three states, now turns a traffic stop or other run-in with police into a path to deportation.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement maintains that parents who are deported have control over what happens to their children. “The parent can decide whether to have the child leave with them or stay in the U.S.,” an ICE spokesperson wrote in an email to the Applied Research Center, explaining the new data.

Yet, as our research on the intersections of immigration enforcement and the child welfare system shows, that is not always the case. Detained and deported parents regularly face the prospect of permanently losing their parental rights because their children are in the foster care system. These parents are often left out of decisions about where their children should live.

According to policy advocates, ICE has for years said that it does not believe significant numbers of families are separated in this way.

Emily Butera, senior program officer at the Women’s Refugee Commission, a policy advocacy organization in Washington, said, “ICE tends to say, ‘We think these are isolated incidents.’ Everyone we’ve talked to from DHS and the ICE say that they can’t do anything unless they know how big the problem is.”

Our research suggests the problem is substantial. In just six months, 46,486 parents of an unknown number of U.S.-citizen children were removed. According to our national study, thousands of their children face extended and sometimes permanent separation from their parents.

The data on parents of U.S.-citizens deported is overdue.

In 2009, after Homeland Security’s inspector general released earlier data on the number of deported parents, Congress directed ICE to “begin collecting data on the deportation of parents of U.S.-born children no later than July 1, 2010″ and to report that data at least semi-annually. Despite these demands, no data has been released to the public until now.

The new data suggest that parents living in certain parts of the country are particularly likely to be deported. The breadth of removals includes not only known deportation hubs like Arizona, Texas and California, but also parts of the South and Midwest. The ICE office covering Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina ordered large numbers of deportations, as did the one based in Chicago and covering seven states in the Midwest. These geographic trends provide further evidence of the changing orientation of immigration enforcement; it is moving increasingly to communities in the interior of the country.

As immigration enforcement spreads across the country and more parents of United States citizen children are deported, the collateral effects are likely only to grow.

Seth Freed Wessler's RSS Feed
  • Email Updates

    Contact us with your name and your interest in getting involved and we'll add you to our email updates list!
  • Post Archives

  • Categories

Go to Top