Saturday, February 28, 2015

Jessica Hernandez Autopsy Contradicts Police Statements

Photo From the Denver Post
An autopsy performed by the Denver Medical Examiner with Denver Police present as witnesses, shows Jessica Hernandez was shot while the officers were on the Driver's side of the vehicle and hit the 16 year old youth at least three times, possibly four.  The examination presumably refutes the testimony of officers who claim Hernandez was attempting to back into one of the officers.

An even bigger surprise is the stance each officer must have taken during the shooting.  Two of the bullets penetrated the tiny body of Hernandez, only 60 inches tall, seated in a late model sedan.  The bullets entered the youth's body from left side to right side, in an upward trajectory. 

At least one more bullet entered the youth's body, but took a higher-to-lower trajectory.  This third bullet entered Hernandez's upper left pelvis and exited eventually through her right thigh.  The bullets were not shot at close range because there was no evidence of gunpowder residue.

Denver Police claim Hernandez was backing into one of the officers so the officers shot her in self defense.  However, since the three shots were made from the driver's side of the vehicle, it is difficult to argue the teen was trying to run the offices over.  They could not have been both behind the parked vehicle and on the right side at the same moment.


studyblue.com
Likely, though, one of the officers was crouching near the ground, as the trajectory of two of the bullets were fired upward, one below the lower 6th rib, and a second even lower, and from behind.

The autopsy ruled the death a homicide which, contrary to sensationalist headlines, means little.  Homicide is the killing of one human being by another.  Murder is the wrongful killing of one human being by another.  The Medical Examiner's report did not find a murder had occurred, nor did it exonerate the officers involved.  The ultimate verdict may be rendered in a court of law, or by the Denver Police investigations bureau if it finds the shootings were justified.

Friday, February 20, 2015

Breaking - Obama Requests Emergency Stay For DAPA, DACA

pulsoslp.com
The Department of Justice will ask for an emergency stay to halt the injunction issued by a Texas judge against the Obama immigration order called Deferred Action For Parental Accountability, or DAPA, and an expanded form of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, called "expanded DACA".

White House press secretary, Josh Earnest, says the stay will be applied for no later than Monday.  The stay is likely in addition to the appeal of the injunction issued by Texas judge, Andrew Hanen.

Applying for a stay of an injunction, which is a request to halt the temporary halting, of the Obama order, is risky.  If the stay is not granted, then the failure to get a stay of the Texas injunction could set the tone for the appeal to the Hanen decision as well as to opposition to the lawsuit which gave rise to the decision.

Obstacles to getting the stay are the Conservative nature of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, as well as the fact a stay is usually only applicable to maintaining the status quo pending litigation.  The Hanen decision maintains the status quo, and a stay of the injunction would actually allow for substantial changes to the status quo.  Finally, the movement for immigration reform will gain nothing if the 5th Circuit agrees with the Hanen decision that undocumented immigrants, which conservative media incorrectly categorize as "illegal immigrants", don't deserve protection.

The Hanen decision painted the Obama executive order as a states rights versus federal rights issue.  Hanen said the federal government was abdicating it's responsibilities to enforce immigration laws set by Congress and granting immigrants a certain entitlement or right to be in the U.S. for at least a 3 year period.  Hanen found the state of Texas had standing to sue because Texas citizens would be forced to pay for the cost of granting driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants who took advantage of the law.  Texas citizens would be irreparably harmed because of the cost of granting driver's licenses and because it would be very difficult to recall those licenses once they were granted, or "unscramble the egg".  Further, harm to undocumented people was not a concern in an administrative law decision because they were "illegal", said Hanen.

Other states willingly grant licenses to undocumented people, including Washington State, New Mexico and Colorado.  The state of Colorado is sitting on over $100,000 in excess immigrant license fees which state Republicans refuse to release for the license program.  In short, some states have made significant profits by issuing licenses to undocumented immigrants.

Not applying for the stay is just as risky.  If a stay is not issued, few immigrants will be able to apply for the program even if the Hanen decision is eventually overturned before President Obama leaves office.  If the DAPA and expanded DACA process continues, those who are approved would have at least a three year respite before having to face immigration consequences.  The longer it takes for the process to begin, the less time authorities will have to approve applications.

Neither conservatives nor liberals are talking about what could happen to people who apply for DACA, expanded DACA and DAPA applicants if a conservative candidate wins the White House in the next election cycle.  President Obama immediately cancelled multiple executive orders made by the Bush Administration shortly after Obama took office.  It is not unrealistic to expect the next president to take the same action, though a conservative candidate would encounter significant wrath from pro-immigration groups.  If the immigration orders are rescinded, then immigrants who apply for the order would likely be able to continue to live in the U.S. until their stay of deportation ran out, at which point they would find themselves well identified and in the deportation system unless they could find another basis to make a claim to remain in the U.S.

The best solution for immigrants is comprehensive immigration reform.  Senator Michael Bennet, (D-Colo) called for the House to pass the reform bill the senate sent to it and for the nation to look for long term solutions to the immigration problem in the U.S.

Because no other form of relief is available to the majority of the nation's undocumented immigrants, the majority of Latino advocacy groups support the executive order for DAPA and DACA.


Tuesday, February 17, 2015

DAPA Applicants Encouraged To Continue Despite Court Order

ablive
Immigrants who believe they will qualify under the Obama executive order which prioritizes removal (deportation) prospects, and grant certain immigrants a three year stay SHOULD CONTINUE preparing for the launch of the largest program around April 16th.

Melissa Crow, Legal Director for the American Immigration Council, Marielena Hincapié, Executive Director of the National Law Center, and Debbie Smith, the Associate General Counsel for the Service Employees International Union, said the Obama Administration will certainly appeal the order by Texas Judge Andrew Hanen which puts a stay, or pause on the implementation of the DAPA and expanded DACA programs.

Immigrants should not despair or be afraid.  The temporary injunction will be eventually lifted, through an appeal to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, according to Marielena Hincapié.  

Current DACA qualified immigrants are not affected by the stay.  They may continue under their current program and may continue to renew their status.  

Melissa Crow said the judge found the state of Texas, at least, had standing to bring the suit.  Further, the state would experience financial harm in issuing driver's licenses because it would have to offer licenses to DACA and DAPA immigrants.  Crow said it was interesting the Court focused on the license issue, and over-looked evidence about the positive effects immigrants make to the economy.

Crow continued to say the court found the Obama Administration failed to comply with rule making procedure.  However, Crow said enforcement actions are generally not subject to rule making.  She says the Obama Administration  is on solid footing in issuing it's executive order.

Debbie Smith said immigrants should not panic.  She believes the suspension is temporary, will likely be lifted, and immigrants should continue preparing for the process, including gathering documents.

The temporary stay of execution of the Obama executive order is not a final decision about whether the DACA and DAPA processes should continue.  Those decisions will be made later during extended litigation.  The DAPA portion of the executive rule is not scheduled to roll out until April 16th.  By then, the temporary stay could be lifted or "stayed" pending the final resolution of the lawsuit.



Tuesday, February 3, 2015

Senate Stops Defunding of Executive Action For Immigrants



Bill to Stop Executive Action Fails in the Senate, Immigrant Rights Groups Respond



San Diego: The Senate voted down the House's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations Bill with anti-immigrant amendments that would have defunded DHS in order to block relief for millions of immigrant families, workers, and youth.

Pedro Rios, AFSC
The San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium (SDIRC) praised Senators who voted against the divisive bill and called on the Senate and House leadership to stop playing politics with our families' lives.

Pedro Rios, SDIRC Community Representative and Director of the American Friends Service Committee in San Diego, released the following statement:

We applaud the Senators who supported immigrant families by voting against HR 240. We thank them for taking a stand against anti-immigrant measures that hurt our communities and break up our families. Adding anti-immigrant amendments to the DHS funding bill is irresponsible governing. It's time to stop the political theatre and work towards immigration legislation that supports border communities.

Since 2007, San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium (SDIRC) has worked to bring together leaders from the faith, labor, and legal communities to advocate policies that promote the civic and human rights of immigrants and is comprised of 20 organizations from throughout San Diego County. 

Monday, February 2, 2015

Republicanos en el senado votaron en contra de una iniciativa para mejorar el programa de licencias

Republicanos en el senado votaron en contra de una iniciativa para mejorar el programa de licencias
 

DENVER - A pesar de los beneficios de seguridad pública que hace asegurar que los residentes puedan obtener aseguranza de auto y una licencia de conducir, los Republicanos en el Senado del comité del Estado, los Veteranos, los Asuntos Militares votaron en contra de un proyecto de ley para ampliar los documentos necesarios para obtener una tarjeta de identificación o licencia. Hubiera alineado requisitos de documentación de residencia de Colorado con los de las prácticas federales de inmigración.
El proyecto de ley (SB 15-066) habría hecho tres cosas básicas:
• Se hubiera permitido que el número de seguro social del solicitante pudiera ser utilizado como un forma admisible de documentación para obtener una licencia de conducir o una tarjeta de identificación;
• Hubiera alineado los requisitos de documentación de residencia con los mismos requisitos federales de inmigración.
• Hubiera declarado que los estudiantes internacionales no tendrían que renunciar su licencia de conducir de otro país para obtener una identificación o licencia en Colorado.
"Esta legislación fue diseñada para asegurar que todos los residentes de Colorado pudieran obtener una licencia y aseguranza de auto", dijo el Senador Jessie Ulibarri, D-Westminster, el patrocinador del proyecto de ley y el miembro principal Demócrata en el Comité de del Estado, los Veteranos, los Asuntos Militares. "La derrota de este proyecto de ley es mala para la seguridad pública."

#newsanctuarymovement Citizens Speak Out