CLINIC constitutes one expression of the Catholic Church’s commitment to welcome and defend newcomers in the United States. CLINIC’s work draws its inspiration from the Gospel mandate to serve the marginalized and the newcomer. It also reflects the Church’s own tradition of exile, flight and migration. Catholic social teaching identifies the Holy Family, in their flight to Egypt, as the “archetype of every refugee family.” It emphasizes that Jesus identified with newcomers (“I was a stranger and you welcomed me”), so that in the Catholic tradition, newcomers “image” God.
By Charles Wheeler
The Ninth Circuit recently weighed in on one of most ambiguous and hotly contested provisions in the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA): whether a derivative child who has aged out and is the beneficiary of a new petition filed by the LPR parent can retain the priority date of the petition originally filed for the parent. The answer lies on how the court interprets a section of the CSPA that is codified in INA § 203(h)(3). It reads as follows:
Congratulations to Jack Holmgren, CLINIC's attorney and Field Support Coordinator in San Francisco, on receiving an award from the East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Berkeley, California. The East Bay Sanctuary Covenant is celebrating its 30th year providing assistance to refugees, asylees and other immigrants from all over the world providing a broad range of administratively-based immigration legal services through 15 staff and volunteers.
CLINIC congratulates Carlos Guevara, staff at the Diocese of Grand Rapids, Grand Rapids, Michigan on being granted partial accreditation by the Board of Immigration Appeals on September 18, 2012.
At the end of August, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) blocked recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) from participating in healthcare coverage options under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).
In August, a three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rendered decisions on
Alabama’s and Georgia’s immigration enforcement laws. The panel blocked some controversial
parts of these laws, including: (1) Alabama’s Section 28, requiring public K-12 schools to count
newly-enrolling unlawfully present children; (2) Alabama’s Section 27, voiding most private
contracts entered into with unlawfully present individuals; and (3) Alabama’s Section 13 and
Georgia’s Section 8, criminalizing the harboring or transporting of unlawfully present
On September 18, federal district court Judge Susan Bolton removed the block that she had previously placed on Arizona SB 1070’s Section 2(B) (“show me your papers”). In early September, Judge Bolton rejected the latest round of legal challenges to Section 2(B), which had been made by a coalition of plaintiffs on preemption, Equal Protection, and Fourth Amendment grounds. Section 2(B) of SB 1070 is now in effect, and Arizona police officers may now try to enforce it.