Texas Civil Rights Review

Author: mopress

  • Neza Family Reports Prison Visit by Rep. Gohmert

    By Greg Moses

    The family of imprisoned asylum seeker Rrustem Neza tells the Texas Civil Rights Review that he was visited Friday by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Lufkin).

    The visit comes as welcome news for Rrustem’s brother Xhemal (pronounced Jehmal) Neza who was shocked by the way Rrustem looked during a visit on Thursday.

    After seeing his brother Rrustem at the LaSalle Detention Facility in Jena, Louisiana on Thursday evening, Xhemal drove to Dallas Friday morning to swear out an affidavit of his impressions.

    “When I saw him he was wasted,” says Xhemal about Rrustem in the affidavit provided by attorney John Wheat Gibson of Dallas. “He was wearing the same clothes he had on when he was arrested two weeks ago. His face looked as if he were dead. It made me very weak to see his face.”

    The affidavit alleges that since his arrest on Aug. 5 Rrustem has been kept in “a hole” or solitary confinement in a room of about three feet by six feet with a slit on the door but no window to the outside.

    “I believe Congressman Gohmert saved Rrustem’s life by his intervention,” says Friday’s affidavit. Xhemal says he approached the facility two times prior to Thursday seeking to visit his brother, but it was only after Rep. Gohmert’s office stepped in that a successful visit was completed.

    The Neza brothers applied for asylum in the USA after they fled Albania following a political assassination. Xhemal’s asylum was granted, but Rrustem’s was denied. The family believes the difference in treatment can be explained chiefly by the difference in attorneys handling the cases.

    Rrustem and his brothers fear that a forced return to Albania would endanger his life.

    The LaSalle Detention Facility in Jena, Louisiana is operated by the GEO Group, Inc. under a “perpetual” contract between the LaSalle Economic Development District (LEDD) of LaSalle Parish and the federal bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

    A recent $30 million dollar expansion of the former juvenile facility has increased the capacity of the center from 416 beds to 1,160, according to news clips archived online at privateci.org.

    “The contract is expected to generate approximately $23.5 million in annualized operating revenues for GEO at full occupancy,” stated a Business Wire press release of July, 2007.

    The Texas Civil Rights Review will continuing to monitor developments in this case.

  • Plans Continue for Hutto Protest Aug. 22

    The Aug. 22 Freedom Walk and Protest Vigil of the T. Don Hutto prison for immigrants is still scheduled as planned. Organizers are calling for a noon gathering at Heritage Park in Taylor, Texas, and a 1p.m. walk to the Hutto facility. A rally is scheduled from 2p.m. to 5p.m.

    Organizer Pedro Ruiz of the Texas Indigenous Council remains critical of the detention status quo. Although the federal government has announced that families with children will no longer be assigned to the Hutto facility, Ruiz says moving the issue to the Berks facility in Pennsylvania is not a satisfactory solution:

    “They can call it whatever they want to call it,” Díaz told the San Antonio Current. “But if families are not free to go, it’s still a detention center. We used Berks as a template of what we wanted Hutto to look like but, in my mind, a golden cage is still a cage. If you’re not free, you’re not free.”

  • Texas Education ''Reform'' Measure, HB 3 – SB 3, Criticized by Valley Pastor

    By Nick Braune

    There is much discussion of an education bill in the Texas legislature, HB 3 – SB 3, which has some good aspects and some bad ones. I recently interviewed Rev. Bob Clark, a peace and justice advocate in the Valley who is a Methodist pastor serving the economically hard-hit San Juan/Pharr area.

    Braune: Rev. Clark, you told me about a bill you are tracking. It apparently has a lot of supporters and some who have worries about it. It would allow, if I understand it right, two types of high school diplomas in the state. What is the issue and how are you looking at it?

    Clark: For the last twenty-five years the state of Texas has been dealing with education accountability, bringing us successively the TAAS and TAKS tests; this new bill (HB 3 – SB 3) is the latest installment in the state’s ongoing crusade to fix students and rate our schools.

    While the new bill is a slight improvement (doing away with mandatory retention) there are some glaring problems. Of these, one that is of special concern is this: if passed in its present form, the bill would create a two-track system in our schools. One group of children would be aimed at university and the other at tech-school or a job. There would actually be two different diplomas issued depending on which track the student completed.

    Braune: How do you answer those who simply respond that everyone is not ready for college?

    Clark: While it is true that not everyone will go to college, and on the surface, it seems good to identify those students who will not be “college ready”, such a plan is ripe for abuse. Here in the Rio Grande Valley, we are painfully aware of the negative effects of tracking. For years Hispanic students were automatically tracked toward “job readiness” while Anglo students were all tracked toward University. (As we know, abuses like that are what created the famous Edcouch/Elsa High School Walkout in 1968.) And tracking assumes that through testing one can determine the future potential of a student, even as early as in eighth grade. Imagine the loss to the world had Albert Einstein, who could not pass high school algebra, been tracked toward a career as a Wal-Mart greeter.

    Braune: Is it going to pass?

    Clark: There will be a fight. Backers of the current bill include champions of industry and commerce, the business community. Why? In a word, profit. A two diploma system creates an underclass marked as workers and a higher valued class destined to become professionals. Those with a “Texas Diploma” will automatically be considered of higher value than those with the inferior diploma. An inferior diploma translates into lower wages for workers and by extension higher profits for big business. In the same way that a person with a B.A. can be hired for a lower wage than a person with an M.A., a person without a “Texas Diploma” can be hired for less.

    Additional note: After learning about this issue from Rev. Clark, I spoke to State Representative Armando Martinez about it. Already alert to the problems in HB-3, he and some other legislators are hoping to x-out that sort of “two-track” talk from the bill. I also spoke with Terry Brown of Valley Interfaith. Her organization does considerable lobbying and is worried about the bill, and she told me about a conversation she had with a Valley school superintendant who is dead-set against the two-track approach. There is growing opposition.

    [The interview with Rev. Clark previously appeared in the Mid-Valley Town Crier.]

  • DREAM Act: Preserving the American Dream for Immigrant Children

    By Elliot Cole
    Community Relations
    Texas Civil Rights Project

    Each year, roughly three million students graduate from US high schools. Some students enter the workforce directly, while others opt for the armed services. Many, however, choose to go college, developing their potential through academics.

    However, 65,000 graduates will never have that option, including tens of thousands in Texas. They are prom queens, honor students, and athletes. They are tutors, class representatives, and valedictorians. Nonetheless, no matter their ability, they will be denied the ability to become doctors, teachers, or to pursue a law degree.

    Though they have lived in the US for almost all of their lives, these students have inherited the label of undocumented immigrant, and for that will not be able to pursue upper education. Simply because they were born in another country they are treated as second-class citizens, disallowed from pursuing their respective dreams. This is counter-productive, foolish, and unwarrantable.

    On March 26, 2009, the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act was introduced in Congress to give those dreams back. The proposed law provides a six-year conditional residency during which undocumented graduates can pursue a two-year degree, attend two years of a four-year degree, or serve two years in the military. An immigrant who completes any of those three conditions and is otherwise in good legal standing at the time will earn a well-deserved permanent residency. Immigrants would not be eligible for federal college grants, but would be able to apply for student loans and work study.

    With the support of President Obama and senators and Congress members on all sides of the political landscape, the DREAM Act is as an opportunity. It’s a chance to be fair and to readjust our attitude toward students who have done nothing but strive toward becoming contributing members of society.

    The students affected by the DREAM Act have not committed a crime against our country, as some will argue. They are simply the children of illegal immigrants. They know no home other than the United States. It is time we embrace them rather than act as if they did not exist. This is their community, and they will be able to contribute to our society with a college education.

    In the current economic struggle, passing the DREAM Act makes even more sense. By introducing an educated group to the workforce, more taxes will be paid, more jobs created, more goods purchased, and more businesses founded. Every year we turn away thousands of students graduating from our high schools who could contribute to this economy. It’s contradictory and senseless.

    Some may argue that the influx of these new students to the state colleges would somehow make state universities suffer. In truth, the state school system will benefit from the new student pool, and the bill already has support from university presidents nationwide.

    The DREAM Act is an investment in our country’s collective future. With passage of the bill, dedicated graduates will not be barred from an education; they will be able to help their communities — and society as a whole — grow and flourish.

    The DREAM Act has backing from all sectors of society, from religious leaders to universities. It has bipartisan backing from coast-to-coast. With the advantages it will provide our state, it should have the support of Texans as well.

    * * * * *

    The Texas Civil Rights Project, a nonprofit foundation, promotes civil rights and economic and racial justice throughout Texas, attempting to bring about systemic change through education and litigation.

  • Update on the Border Patrol’s Callousness about Emergency Evacuations

    By Nick Braune

    For well over a year, the South Texas Civil Rights Project (STCRP) has been urging the Border Patrol to recognize that its job should include an elemental human concern: the safety of the population during hurricanes or other disasters. There is a simple problem. The Border Patrol, in its eagerness to enforce immigration rules, apparently wants it known that it will be checking IDs to see who is and who is not a citizen, etc., even during emergency evacuations. But if the word is out that the Border Patrol will be checking IDs, many undocumented people and others may simply risk their lives by not evacuating.

    The STCRP held another press conference in the Rio Grande Valley this month: On August 7th, an article in the McAllen daily newspaper, The Monitor, covered the story:

    “The U.S. Border Patrol has stated it will continue operating its checkpoints in the event of a storm, including the Sarita and Falfurrias checkpoints located on U.S. 77 and U.S. 281, respectively. (U.S. 281 is a designated hurricane evacuation route.) ‘An evacuation doesn’t preclude us from doing our job,’ said John Lopez, local spokesman for the agency. But activists fear such inspections would encourage the Rio Grande Valley’s estimated 150,000 illegal immigrants to ride out a hurricane in their homes to avoid deportation. Many live in unincorporated colonias — areas that are particularly vulnerable to heavy storms due to the lack of adequate infrastructure.”

    It was only last summer when terrible damage in Galveston occurred from a hurricane, one which those of us in the Rio Grande Valley thought for a day or so was going to hit here. But if last summer’s big hurricane had hit here instead of a few hundred miles north of us, numbers of undocumented immigrants would not have evacuated. They would have stayed home, afraid of the hassle with the Patrol.

    Corinna Spencer-Scheurich, an attorney with STCRP, says it is important for the Border Patrol to keep some distance from exits and shelters during an emergency. “This is about human life, not law enforcement,” she says.

    The situation has become even more complicated this year since a new law goes into effect in September making it a crime not to evacuate when a general order has gone out. Spencer-Scheurich is quoted in The Monitor as saying that this is going to make an even tougher situation for the undocumented. “If they evacuate, they could be deported. And if they stay, they could be arrested and then deported.”

    Spencer-Scheurich explained in a phone call with this reporter that as far as this issue is concerned there has been no major difference between the Obama administration and the Bush administration. “We got about the same form letter from the Border Patrol this year as we did during the Bush administration. Although we are working case by case, we need a national level policy and we can’t leave important decisions to be made at the last minute.” Spencer-Scheurich emphasized that in an emergency, when people are scrambling to get their bottled water and their batteries and other supplies ready, they can’t wait too long for the Border Patrol to make a decision to be humane. Not only hurricanes present this problem: there have been cases in California of immigrants driving toward dangerous wildfires instead of away from them because the Border Patrol has failed to make the proper public announcement about their enforcement stance during evacuations.

    Evacuation emergencies are not the right time to force lines of people to stop and have their IDs checked. Spencer-Scheurich emphasized that everyone has to know ahead of time that an evacuation can be smooth for everyone, hassle free and fast.