maldef

MALDEF (Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund)

Far-left racial power group that strongly supports illegal immigration. Name stands for "Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund" (maldef.org). Has received millions from the Ford Foundation since their founding in 1968 link. Their president Thomas Saenz had been under consideration to join the Barack Obama administration but wasn't selected, perhaps because he was considered too far-left. Their former president John Trasvina was selected for the Obama administration and currently serves as Assistant Secretary of HUD.

According to this, in 2005 this was their board of directors:

  • Joseph Stern: Chair
  • Herlinda Garcia:1st Vice Chair
  • Carlos Montoya:2nd Vice Chair
  • Barbara Aldave:3rd Vice Chair
  • Don Pierce:Secretary/Treasurer & Fundraising Committee Chair
  • [[Thomas B. Reston]]:Program & Planning Committee Chair
  • Gilberto Cardenas:Community Education & Leadership Development Committee Chair
  • Ann Marie Wheelock:Personnel & Nominations Committee Chair
  • Antonia Hermandez:President & General Counsel
  • [[Frank Herrera, Jr.]]:Chair, MALDEF Property Management Corp.

Members:

  • Barbara Aldave
  • [[Edward J. Avila]]
  • Mike Baller
  • Norma Cantu
  • [[Anna C. Carbonell]]
  • Gilberto Cardenas
  • Cecilia Chavez-Protas
  • Roberto Cruz
  • Liz Figueroa
  • Herlinda Garcia
  • [[Frank Herrera, Jr.]]
  • [[Robert M. Herzberg]]
  • Federico Jimenez
  • [[Leslie M. Kantor]]
  • [[Arnold J. Kleiner]]
  • Manuel Martinez
  • [[Carlos X. Montoya]]
  • [[Michael A. Olivas]]
  • Norma Orci
  • Don Pierce
  • [[Frank J. Quevedo]]
  • [[Carlos M. Quinones]]
  • Guadalupe Rangel
  • Jesus Rangel
  • [[Thomas B. Reston]]
  • Mat Rezvani
  • [[Jose R. Rodriguez]]
  • Maria Saldana
  • Andrew Segovia
  • Maritza Soto Keen
  • Luis Stelzner
  • Joseph Stern
  • Peter Villegas
  • Ann Marie Wheelock
  • Sam Zamarripa
Last modified Sep 7, 2014
Discussed in (click each link for the full post):

ACLU, SEIU, SPLC, NILC, MALDEF, PRLDEF sue South Carolina over new immigration law - 10/12/11

Just as they have in other states, a coalition of far-left, illegal immigration-supporting groups have sued South Carolina over that state's new Arizona-style immigration law. The groups involved in this case are:

Dozens of pro-illegal immigration groups were invited to Obama's mini-amnesty rollout and you weren't - 08/25/11

On August 18, Barack Obama's Department of Homeland Security announced an administrative amnesty that could cover 300,000 or more illegal aliens.

Supreme Court upholds 2007 Arizona immigration enforcement law; eVerify; losing: US Chamber, DOJ, Berman, NCLR, ADL, SPLC, AILA, SEIU, LULAC - 05/26/11

In a major victory for states that want to reduce illegal immigration, the US Supreme Court has upheld Arizona's 2007 "Legal Arizona Workers Act" employer enforcement law that requires the use of eVerify and that allows Arizona to pull the business licenses of companies that knowingly hire illegal aliens. Note that the 2007 law and the decision have no relation to Arizona's more recent immigration law. A Los Angeles Times article is here, and links to legal documents are here. Sonia Sotomayor voted in dissent; see her name's link.

Those who opposed Arizona's law in court and who lost today include the Obama administration's Department of Justice (see Obama immigration) and the US Chamber of Commerce (see their name and this).

Others who filed briefs in the case and who lost today include (see each link for more on that group):

* Rep. Howard Berman
* National Council of La Raza
* Anti Defamation League
* American Immigration Lawyers Association
* PRLDEF (a former associated group of Sotomayor)
* Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (a former associated group of Barack Obama)
* Southern Poverty Law Center
* Service Employees International Union
* National Day Laborer Organizing Network(NDLON)
* National Immigrant Justice Center
* American Immigration Council
* Asian American Justice Center
* Asian American Institute
* Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund
* Asian Law Caucus
* Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California
* League of United Latin American Citizens
* Legal Aid Society
* Los Abogados Hispanic Bar Association
* National Employment Law Project

Others on the losing side were former senator Arlen Specter and Ron Mazzoli (of the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty fame).

UPDATE: Thomas Saenz of MALDEF (which doesn't appear to have been involved in the suit) weighs in. He got one thing right: just because the 2007 law was upheld doesn't mean SB 1070 will prevail. In my opinion, states should just simply copy Arizona's 2007 law for now.

In any case, here's what Saenz says (maldef.org/news/releases/az_evrfy):

"Today's regrettable decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting is a tortured product of judicial activism responding to perceived political views of the moment. The majority proclaims itself unable to find implied preemption of an Arizona law that plainly impedes a federal scheme of exclusive enforcement of longstanding immigration-related employment law, and then, with a facile shift, easily finds an implied permission for Arizona to mandate E-verify, a power that Congress denied the federal government itself. All of this is accomplished through providing talismanic significance to the word 'licensing' even though Arizona's use of the term violates any plain-language or historical understanding of the term."

"Despite this egregious outcome, today's decision provides little predictive value as to the constitutional issue of preemption with respect to Arizona's SB 1070 and similar laws recently enacted in other states. Laws that encroach on exclusive federal immigration enforcement by mandating or permitting untrained local police officers to engage in racial profiling will find little refuge in today's decision. Wise state and local lawmakers must continue to tread carefully in areas touching on immigration. As has been the case for well over 200 years, federal action remains the sole legitimate avenue to address immigration issues."

UPDATE 2: The ADL weighs in with a bit of a muted press release (adl.org/PresRele/SupremeCourt_33/6050_33.htm). They're "disappointed":

The law increases the legal risks for businesses that employ undocumented workers but fails to provide sufficient \safeguards to protect those workers against unlawful treatment. It undermines federal efforts to balance discrimination concerns with control of illegal immigration.

The Arizona law also requires state use of E-Verify – a federal pilot program that allows employers to verify the eligibility of newly-hired employees – even though the program relies on records that are prone to error. That is one reason Congress has decided to hold off on making participation in the program mandatory.

Although the Court has upheld Arizona's law, we hope other states will show greater concern for the potentially discriminatory impact such laws can have, and choose not to follow Arizona's lead.

And, I hope they do follow Arizona's lead. We'll see how that works out; I tend to think several will.

Illegal aliens can get in-state college tuition, California Supreme Court says (ACLU, MALDEF) - 11/16/10

Yesterday the California Supreme Court ruled [1] that illegal aliens and others can receive the in-state tuition rate at California colleges provided that they've attended California high schools for three or more years. They thus upheld AB 540, also known as the "California DREAM Act".

Both of those are anti-American bills that allow illegal aliens to take college educations away from U.S. citizens. They're bad policy for other reasons too: they encourage illegal immigration and braindrain foreign countries. See the last link for the details.

All of this could have been prevented if people would do things in smart ways and use leverage. The only reason why there's an AB540 and a DREAM Act is because politicians feel free to support such anti-American bills. The way to get all (or all but the extremists) to drop support for such bills is to challenge them on video at their public appearances with the impacts of those bills; see the question at the last link. I've been trying to get people to ask that question for over three years with no help from major rightwing bloggers and the like. Instead, they simply encourage the tea parties types to wave signs and throw tantrums about less popular and less salient issues.

Regarding the suit, the attorney for the plaintiffs Kris Kobach says he'll appeal the decision. On the other side, the American Civil Liberties Union, MALDEF, and school administrators cheered the decision. (quotes to follow)

--------------
[1] From courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S167791.PDF

The main legal issue is this: [8 U.S.C. S 1623, link] provides that an alien not lawfully present in this country shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a state for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of this country is eligible for that benefit. In general, nonresidents of California who attend the state?s colleges and universities must pay nonresident tuition. (Ed. Code, S 68050.) But section 68130.5, subdivision (a), exempts from this requirement students — including those not lawfully in this country — who meet certain requirements, primarily that they have attended high school in California for at least three years. The question is whether this exemption is based on residence within California in violation of section 1623.
Because the exemption is given to all who have attended high school in California for at least three years (and meet the other requirements), and not all who have done so qualify as California residents for purposes of in-state tuition, and further because not all unlawful aliens who would qualify as residents but for their unlawful status are eligible for the exemption, we conclude the exemption is not based on residence in California. Rather, it is based on other criteria. Accordingly, section 68130.5 does not violate section 1623.

Brown-Whitman 10/02/10 debate: a very disturbing view of California's future - 10/05/10

It's a good thing I didn't watch Saturday's Jerry Brown / Meg Whitman debate in the California governor's race: I might have ended up defenestrating the TV. The debate provides a very disturbing preview of the Quebec-style future of California and ultimately the U.S.

City ordinance on day laborers soliciting work is constitutional: appeals court - 06/10/10

From this:

A federal appeals court on Wednesday upheld the city of Redondo Beach's ordinance allowing for the arrest of day laborers who approach automobiles soliciting work.

A divided three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower-court decision.

The appeals court said the city's ordinance, modeled after a Phoenix law upheld by the same court, was a reasonable response to traffic problems that officials said day laborers soliciting work caused at two city intersections. The 2-1 majority noted that Redondo Beach allowed the day laborers an alternative forum to seek work such as passing out literature on sidewalks and in parking lots.

Backstory here, here, here, and here. Note that one of the groups challenging the law at those links was MALDEF; the last note on their page about the case mentions the appeal: preview.maldef.org/immigration/litigation/redondobeach_v_jornaleros

Note also that MALDEF is among those challenging the new Arizona immigration law, and that Arizona's law contains provisions similar in spirit to those in the Redondo Beach law. At the very least this decision won't make MALDEF, the American Civil Liberties Union, and others feel good, and it might have a bearing on challenges to the Arizona law.

UPDATE: The full text is here. Aside from MALDEF, two other groups involved in the case were the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) and the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights. Barack Obama was involved with the second group years ago.

ACLU, SEIU, MALDEF, NAACP, UFCW, NILC sue to block Arizona immigration law (two Mexico links) - 05/17/10

A group of far-left illegal immigration supporters - including the American Civil Liberties Union, a group that's directly collaborating with the Mexican government - filed a suit today to block the Arizona immigration law from going into effect.

Alessandra Soler Meetze lies about Arizona immigration law (ACLU of Arizona, +Dolores Huerta) - 04/29/10

Earlier today, the American Civil Liberties Union (national and Arizona branch), MALDEF, the National Immigration Law Center, Dolores Huerta, Richard Chavez (brother of Cesar Chavez), and Linda Ronstadt (?) held a news conference in Phoenix to protest the new Arizona immigration law and to announce that they'll be mounting a legal challenge (full press release here).

At the event, Alessandra Soler Meetze, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arizona lied about the law:

"This law will only make the rampant racial profiling of Latinos that is already going on in Arizona much worse... If this law were implemented, citizens would effectively have to carry 'their papers' at all times to avoid arrest. It is a low point in modern America when a state law requires police to demand documents from people on the street."

One would think that if there were such profiling that the Department of Justice would have been able to catch it. Yet, after their fishing expedition, they choose to go after Joe Arpaio for something unrelated to profiling. And, one wouldn't expect the assistant secretary for ICE to have defended Arpaio against claims that he profiles.

Further, citizens wouldn't have to carry their "papers" (a not-so-subtle breaking of Godwin's Law) all the time; native-born citizens won't raise "reasonable suspicion", and those who've gone through a long naturalization process will be able to describe that process and, even without "papers", prove that they're citizens. And, almost all of those will have some reasonable form of ID on them, such as a driver's license. And, in order to be asked they've have to have "lawful contact" and then raise "reasonable suspicion" and even after that the cop still has leeway: they don't have to ask if it's "[im]practicable" or would impede an investigation.

The last line is just as deceptive as the rest: the state law does not "require[] police to demand documents from people on the street." As stated above, you first need "lawful contact" and then "reasonable suspicion", and after all that the cop has leeway.

If Alessandra Soler Meetze has to lie about that, can you trust the lawsuit she wants to bring or her other statements?

Note also the short video from the event (peekURL.com/vz3vdr2) where Huerta says, referring to MALDEF and others fighting Proposition 187, "after they filed that lawsuit [against 187], a million Latinos became citizens". The audience cheers, and those in the audience raise their fists. Needless to say, that's just the latest in a barely-concealed desire by many Hispanic leaders not to do what's best for the U.S. but simply to amass race-based power.

NILC, ACLU, AILA, NCLR, Schey, hundreds more demand Obama ends 287g program - 08/27/09

Continuing their campaign against the 287g program, the American Civil Liberties Union - a group that is/was directly collaborating with the Mexican government - informs us that they and about 500 other groups have sent a letter to

Napolitano immigration meeting: you weren't represented (vast # of loose borders groups, Obama/Janet anti-287g) - 08/20/09

Earlier today, Janet Napolitano of the Department of Homeland Security held a closed-door meeting with a group of what she calls "stakeholders" (dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1250792978709.shtm) but was actually a vast pantheon (see below) of far-left, racial power, corrupt business, and in general loose borders groups all of which want some form of comprehensive immigration reform, aka amnesty. There were at least 98 participants in the meeting, and none of them represent your interests or the interests of the great majority of American citizens. Why exactly they'd hold the meeting isn't clear; aside from guest workers and minor details they're all pretty much on the same page. Perhaps it was a strategy session to see how they could fool as many people as possible whenever they decide to push for amnesty.

According to Ali Noorani of the National Immigration Forum (link) Obama stopped by:

The President said specifically that when it comes to the local police charged with enforcing federal immigration law under 287(g) agreements that he wants these local law enforcement agencies held accountable.

And:

Noorani’s other question concerned the 287g program, which gives local law enforcement the authority to enforce immigration law. Noorani asked Napolitano to revoke the authority of agencies who have clearly violated the spirit of the agreement, and that the immigration reform community looked forward to seeing that happen. Napolitano responded, “Me, too.”

Other statements from those attending the meeting are here. Here's the intro to the DHS's press release:

"Today’s meeting on comprehensive immigration reform was an important opportunity to hear from stakeholders and build on the significant time I’ve spent on the Hill meeting with members of Congress on this critical subject. I look forward to working with President Obama, my colleagues in Congress and representatives from law enforcement, business, labor organizations, the interfaith community, advocacy groups and others as we work on this important issue.”

---------------
UPDATE: Griswold of CATO weighs in with a slab of Policy-As-Highschool (cato-at-liberty.org/2009/08/21/the-president-drops-by-to-tout-immigration-reform). After Napolitano gave her "opening remarks we broke up into smaller roundtable discussions of about 15 people each moderated by DHS officials". They then reconvened and Napolitano discussed what they'd learned. Then, Obama entered the building and made his speech "about 20 feet from where I was sitting". Griswold also refers to himself as a "small fish"; he's much too modest since he was some kind of inspiration for Bush's 2004 anti- and un-American guest workers plan.
---------------

And, there are so many groups that I've split the list into two parts. The religious, union, city/police, and miscellaneous groups are here. The following has the major groups, the business groups, and the single libertarian:

ACLU sues Sheriff Joe Arpaio for alleged racial profiling (Dan Pochoda) - 08/19/09

The American Civil Liberties Union - an organization that is/was collaborating with the Mexican government in a scheme that would help that government profit from illegal activity inside the U.S. - is suing Maricopa County, Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio for alleged racial profiling and related issues (aclu.org/immigrants/workplace/40777prs20090819.html). According to the ACLU, a father and son - the first a long-term legal resident, the second a U.S. citizen - were detained by Arpaio's deputies while they were conducting an immigration raid at a business:

The lawsuit charges that the MCSO deputies racially profiled the father and son as they drove their pickup truck on a busy public road and illegally arrested and detained them, violating the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law and prohibition on unreasonable seizures.

The ACLU admits that this occured 100 yards from the business, and according to the Associated Press the father works at the location of the raid (link). There's probably a good chance that it will come out that the deputies had a reason to stop the pair. It's interesting that this is one of the few cases involving Arpaio that illegal immigration supporters like the ACLU have tried to hang their hats on.

ACLU lawyers involved include "Dan Pochoda, Legal Director of the ACLU of Arizona and lead counsel on the case", Cecillia Wang, and Annie Lai.

9/18/09 UPDATE: Others involved in the suit are Steptoe and Johnson, MALDEF, and Somos America.

Thomas Saenz: new president of MALDEF (Villaraigosa, Obama's DOJ, support for illegal immigration) - 07/16/09

Thomas Saenz - current chief counsel to Los Angeles City mayor Antonio Villaraigosa - has been selected to be the new president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). He was under consideration to head the civil rights division of the Department of Justice until that was withdrawn due perhaps to him and his affiliations being a bit too on the extreme side.

Under his leadership, MALDEF will continue their strong support for illegal immigration. Per Phil Willon of the Los Angeles Times (link):

Among his priorities as head of the Latino civil rights organization, Saenz said, is ensuring that all children have equal access to a quality public education. The fund also will continue to combat anti-illegal immigrant sentiment that has been on the rise in some parts of the country. He said comprehensive immigration reform is a critical challenge for the Obama administration and Congress.

Willon also quotes their chairwoman Patricia Madrid:

"The Latino community is currently facing a drastic rise in hate crimes and witnessing an explosive rebirth of extremist anti-immigrant rhetoric and measures that adversely affect all Latinos..."

That "drastic rise" is only true if you try to mislead with statistics.

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights supports illegal immigration, misleads about hate crimes (SPLC, MALDEF, ADL, NCLR, NHMC...) - 06/19/09

The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights has released a new report called "Confronting the New Faces of Hate: Hate Crimes in America 2009" [1]. It's the latest salvo in the attempt by several far-left groups to support massive illegal immigration and to silence their critics. They name-check several of those groups, but their exact involvement in the report isn't clear; the mentions might just be boilerplate.

For just one example of how the LCCR is attempting to mislead, see the attached picture. The ominous-looking graph on the top (from the LCCR) shows anti-Hispanic hate crimes from 2003 to 2007. The graph on the bottom (created by me) uses the same data set, but shows earlier years. Note that 2001 was higher than 2007. And, note also that neither chart are adjusted for population. If that were done, the bottom chart would show that such crimes have actually declined as a percentage of the Hispanic population from 1995. About their misleading chart, they say:

The increasing number of shrill anti-Immigration reform commentaries from high profile national media personalities, including CNN's Lou Dobbs and Talk Show Network's The Savage Nation host Michael Savage, correlates closely with the increase in hate crimes against Hispanics.

The LCCR isn't just confused about correlation not equaling causation, they also don't explain what was happening in 2001; Dobbs had just returned to CNN and was hosting Moneyline. He didn't start his anti-illegal immigration show until 2003.

Another of their targets is FAIR, and they trot out an SPLC report and the usual smears, prefacing their SPLC excerpt with:

The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) have become increasingly concerned about the virulent anti-immigrant and anti-Latino rhetoric employed by a handful of groups and coalitions that have tried to position themselves as legitimate, mainstream advocates against illegal immigration in America.

Whether those groups were involved in this report or are just mentioned in a misbegotten attempt to give the report credibility isn't known. Later, they also quote Alex Nogales of the National Hispanic Media Coalition.

[1] civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/escalating-violence.html

Harry Reid says want immigration "reform" this year; NCLR, MALDEF; business-friendly guest worker plan; promotes unrealistic chain migration - 06/04/09

Earlier today, Harry Reid met with MALDEF and the National Council of La Raza, presumably to discuss comprehensive immigration reform. Before or after, speaking to reporters, he said this:

"As far as I’m concerned, we have three major issues we have to do this year, if at all possible: No. 1 is healthcare; No 2 is energy, global warming; No. 3 is immigration reform... It’s going to happen this session, but I want it this year, if at all possible... ...We need (a guest workers plan not just in agriculture but) in the food industry; we need it in the tourism [business]

Aside from a massive guest worker plan, the rest of what the article says he outlined was the standard compehensive immigration reform. Whether they'll have the time to make Reid's wishes come true remains to be seen.

He also spoke at an event celebrating Asian-American Pacific Islander Heritage Month (link), where he also promoted reform and made various misleading statements:

"Finally, we will again pursue comprehensive immigration reform that respects both our nation’s laws and the people from all nations who want to live in America, work hard and pay their fair share of taxes. And it is critical that we bring families together by cutting down on the long waits for prospective immigrants trying to join their immediate family members in the United States. I am committed to reforming our system in a way that is tough, fair and practical."

He's not only promoting chain migration, he's doing so in a completely unrealistic fashion. Any form of legalization would either have a very delitirious impact on those "prospective immigrants" or would result in thousands of criminals and even some terrorists being legalized. See the immigration line summary for the details.

DOJ blocks Georgia from checking citizenship of voters; GA has evidence of non-citizen voting - 06/02/09

From this press release from Karen Handel, Secretary of State of Georgia:

"The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny preclearance of Georgia’s already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJ’s decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the preclearance submission.

"DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgia’s elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicant’s citizenship status or whether the individual even exists. DOJ completely disregarded Georgia’s obvious and direct interest in preventing non-citizens from voting, instead siding with the ACLU and MALDEF. Clearly, politics took priority over common sense and good public policy.

"This process is critical to protecting the integrity of our elections. We have evidence that non-citizens have voted in past Georgia elections and that more than 2,100 individuals have attempted to register, yet still have questions regarding their citizenship. Further, the Inspector General’s office is investigating more than 30 cases of non-citizens casting ballots in Georgia elections, including the case of a Henry County non-citizen who registered to vote and cast ballots in 2004 and 2006.

Mesa Police chief George Gascon to pay for DC trip out of own funds, refunds "immigration reform" group - 04/12/09

Earlier this month, Mesa, Arizona police chief George Gascon testified before Congress about his opposition to the 287g program. His testimony was sought by Rep. John Conyers and arranged through the agency of county supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox. Hiis trip to DC was paid for by what he called at the time a "group of nonprofit organizations that are seeking immigration reform". This caused a firestorm of protest, and now Gascon has decided to return the money, pay for the trip out of his own pocket, and count the time he spent in DC against his vacation time (link).

Now, here's something curious:

[In his statement, Gascon] said initially he was told a group of nonprofits "concerned with immigration reform and civil rights" were paying for his trip.

"Subsequently, I was informed that the cost was covered by Respect Respeto, a local non-profit," Gascon states. The Phoenix-based Respect Respeto describes itself as a human rights group.

If they didn't give him the money directly, who did? Was it sent to him in a plain envelope with no return address or something? Or - just wildly speculating here - was Wilcox the baglady?

As for Respect, they're headed by Lydia Guzman who's also VP of Somos America. Per the 2005 page votingrightsact.org/hearings/4705hearing/panelists.html:

Lydia Guzman serves as Outreach Director for the Clean Elections Institute, Inc. in Phoenix, Arizona. Ms. Guzman has more than 15 years experience with voter registration, education and Get Out The Vote campaigns. She was Arizona State Director for the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project and prior to that was the Director of Voter Outreach for the Arizona Secretary of State. Ms. Guzman was a Clean Elections candidate for Senate in 2004.

Per a .doc file at azclean.org, she's been a member of MALDEF, League of United Latin American Citizens, and NALEO. In 2000, she was a state president of the Mexican American Political Association (englishfirst.org/be/arizona/az203anti.htm). She was named SVREP's Arizona director in 2004: svrep.org/press_room/press_releases/04/az/lydia_012704.html

Jerry Gonzalez of GALEO on Georgia's "anti-immigrant" views - 04/02/09

Jerry Gonzalez - a former MALDEF Legislative Policy Analyst now with the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials takes to the pages of the Atlanta Journal Constitution with "Anti-immigrant view hurts state" (

John Trasvina of MALDEF named to Obama administration (HUD assistant secretary) - 03/29/09

John Trasvina - president of the strongly pro-illegal immigration group MALDEF - has been nominated to the Obama administration. His title is "Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)". This follows the de-appointment of his co-worker Thomas Saenz to another post.

There's more on the FHEO office here: hud.gov/offices/fheo/aboutfheo/aboutfheo.cfm Among other things, they:

...manage the Fair Housing Assistance Program, administer the award and management of Fair Housing Initiatives Program grants, and propose fair housing legislation... ... conduct oversight of the Government-Sponsored Enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to ensure consistency with the Fair Housing Act... ... work with private industry, fair-housing and community advocates on the promotion of voluntary fair housing compliance...

What that boils down to is multiple ways that Trasvina might be able to help fund groups that support illegal immigration (see the National Council of La Raza's "Raza Development Fund"). And, he might be in a position to help encourage illegal aliens and low-wage workers buy homes. He might also be in a position to fight against local ordinances such as the ones in Farmers Branch or Escondido that tried to prevent landlords from renting to illegal aliens (see this and this). And, he might be able to stock the lower levels of HUD with others who think like he does in order to carry on the tradition.

Thomas Saenz of MALDEF is new DOJ civil rights division chief (Villaraigosa) - 02/24/09

Per the Los Angeles Daily Journal (reblogged by the WSJ here), the new head of the civil rights division at the Department of Justice is Thomas Saenz.

For about a dozen years, Saenz worked as an attorney for the far-left, illegal immigration-supporting Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), and lately he was of counsel to the far-left, illegal immigration-supporting mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa.

Needless to say, the ACLU cheered the news:

"I don’t think the president or attorney general could make a better selection," said Mark Rosenbaum, legal director of the ACLU of Southern California. "He's a throwback to the great civil rights attorney pioneers, like Thurgood Marshall." ...Rosenbaum praised Saenz’s work challenging the legality of voter measures, ranging from Proposition 187, the ballot initiative that sought to cut off social and education services to undocumented immigrants, to his work on the University of Michigan case challenging the legality of affirmative action in admissions.

NDN admits: Census padding with non-citizens to gain race-based power ("Latinos" meet in DC; redistricting) - 01/19/09

Fernanda Santos of the New York Times offers "Immigration Tops Latinos' Wish List at D.C. Meeting" (link), discussing a meeting held today in Washington DC featuring John Trasvina of MALDEF, Rosa Rosales of the League of United Latin American Citizens, and Simon Rosenberg of the New Democratic Network. As could be expected, it falsely assumes that those racial-power-seeking leaders represent all Hispanics ("[MALDEF] hosted the event, the second annual Latino State of the Union, a gathering of advocates, civil rights activists and lawmakers representing the interests of the Latino community").

And, Rosenberg amplified the previous thoughts of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus:

[He] said that the Latino vote is now too important to be ignored and that might help speed things up in Congress, especially as congressional district lines will be redrawn after the 2010 Census. Certainly some Republican leaders are urging their party to figure out a way to regain Latino support that eroded during this presidential election... "I anticipate a dramatic shift in power toward heavily Latino parts of the United States" following the redistricting, Mr. Rosenberg said. "Remember: in redistricting, we count people, not citizens."

In other words, Rosenberg wants to dilute the votes of U.S. citizens using legal immigrants and illegal aliens in order to gain political power. See also Should illegal aliens count towards Congressional representation?, "Under bill, illegals wouldn't count toward political clout", and Crooked Massachusetts Dems: count illegal aliens to save Cong. seat.

Note also this:

"[Trasvina] mentioned that Latinos have "friends in high places" in the Obama administration, like the Interior secretary designate, Ken Salazar; the Labor secretary designate, Hilda Solis; and the White House's director of intergovernmental affairs, Cecilia Munoz, formerly a vice president of the National Council de la Raza.

And:

In remarks read by Tina Tchen, who will be the White House director of public liaison, Mr. Obama said to Latinos, "You showed how powerful you are on Nov. 4" and that the appointments are "a measure of my commitment" of forming a government that reflects the nation's diversity.

"Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act" (Lincoln Diaz-Balart, NCLR, SCHIP) - 01/19/09

Rep. Lincoln Diaz Balart has introduced "Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act of 2009" ("LICHIA", HR319, H.R.319, link) which would add coverage for immigrant children and pregnant women to the SCHIP bill. Legal immigrants aren't able to obtain those benefits for five years.

Rights Working Group wants immigration enforcement moratorium and much more (ACLU, NCLR, 248 others) - 01/09/09

The Asian American Justice Center runs the Rights Working Group, a coalition of over 250 leftwing groups, and they have a petition calling on Barack Obama to in effect not do immigration enforcement. They want a "moratorium" while the subject of raids and the like is "studied", but everyone knows what that means.

NCLR, LULAC, MALDEF, SEIU, LNHI: universal healthcare for illegal aliens (Latino Agenda for Healthcare Reform) - 12/23/08

On December 12, the group Latinos for National Health Insurance (LNHI, president Jaime Torres) convened a meeting in Washington DC where they and a host of other groups created a coalition called the Latino Agenda for Healthcare Reform. They called for an end to a supposed disparity in healthcare coverage between Hispanics and other groups.

And, they also demanded "access to high quality, culturally and linguistically competent care to every man, woman and child who lives in the United States and its territories". In other words, they want universal healthcare to include illegal aliens. The groups involved, their agenda, and parts of their press release (link) follows.

"Latinos push for Cabinet posts": NCLR, MALDEF, NALEO trying to embed supporters in Obama administration - 11/07/08

"Latinos" want to be named to positions in the Barack Obama administration. Actually, it appears they want a quota system. And, it's not really "Latinos" as a group, but the familiar far-left pressure groups such as the NCLR, MALDEF, and NALEO. The second has an indirect link to the Mexican government, and the last has a direct link.

The ethnic boosting "reporter" Gebe Martinez of the Politico offers "Latinos push for Cabinet posts" (link). Here's the quota bit:
Weeks before Barack Obama won the presidency, he met privately in Washington with his former Democratic rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, and Latino political leaders who had fervently backed her bid.

The cards were laid upon the table, according to one of the participants. The Hispanic leaders said they expected at least two Latinos to be named to an Obama Cabinet — meeting the standard set by President-elect Bill Clinton in 1992 — but preferred three. Of course, they also wanted sub-Cabinet-level posts.
Then, she says that Latinos pushed Obama over the top; I'll wait for a reliable source.
...Cecilia Munoz, vice president of National Council of La Raza, said, “It’s a foregone conclusion that we should be at the table for policy debates and in a position of authority, " because Hispanics are affected by major issues facing all voters. Latinos will be prominent in an Obama administration "just as we would be in any administration moving forward," she added.

...Any diminishment of the Hispanic presence in today's society and politics "would be a colossal mistake," said Arturo Vargas, executive director of National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials. "Latinos have demonstrated they can have an impact."

...Before the election, two dozen groups that make up the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda turned over to Obama and John McCain policy recommendations that included adding more Hispanics to the federal workforce, increasing Hispanic political appointments and naming more Latinos to the federal bench.

The coalition will be collecting resumes to submit to Obama's transition team. "It behooves us to not just suggest that the administration hire Latinos. We need to also provide good candidates," said Peter Zamora of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

NALEO's Vargas worries that, early on, the only names usually mentioned for possible appointment to the Obama administration are New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Obama's Hispanic adviser Federico Pena — two Democrats who previously served in the Clinton administration.

...[Raul Yzaguirre] said he and others addressed that issue frankly with Obama at their meeting several weeks ago. "We said, ‘Look, if you are going to see us as late-comers, that's not going to work. If you see us as partners from here on, we will have a good relationship.' And he said he welcomed our support," Yzaguirre said...

NCLR, LULAC, MALDEF, NALEO, SVREP send letter to John McCain about immigration - 09/02/08

John McCain is too corrupt to stand up to the far-left and those who support illegal immigration, prefering instead - like Bush - to court those who will never support him.

Ask John McCain about the impacts of amnesty ("comprehensive immigration reform") - 08/30/08

Here's a question you're urged to ask John McCain at one of his public events. Make sure and videotape the question and the answer, and then upload it to Youtube and other sites. If anyone asks this I can provide follow-ups, and of course feel free to adapt it to your speaking style or remove parts of the first paragraph as necessary:

Senator McCain: the immigration "reform" you support will give a great deal of political power to groups on the far-left (ACLU, SPLC), racial power groups (NCLR, LULAC, MALDEF), the Democrats, the Mexican government, and others.

Rep. Chris Cannon loses in Utah! (Jason Chaffetz) - 06/24/08

Illegal immigration-supporting hack and Republican Congressman from Utah Chris Cannon will lose the primary election to Jason Chaffetz. With over 80% of the votes counted at post time, Chaffetz leads 60% to about 40%, so it's safe to call.

There are about forty posts at this site mentioning Cannon; use the search function to see them all.

MALDEF's "Truth in Immigration" misleads about 14th Amendment quote (Lamar Smith) - 06/03/08

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) has at least an indirect link to the Mexican government, and they run a website called "Truth in Immigration" (TII) which, as we'll see, is a misnomer. Their "Fear-mongering in Congress" (truthinimmigration.org/CompleteStory.aspx?sid=55) discusses an attempt by Rep.

Washington Times sinks to supporting John McCain, amnesty - 05/08/08

The Washington Times - last seen imposing new, euphemism-friendly guidelines - offers the editorial "McCain's quest for the Hispanic vote".

ACLU now working with Mexican government - 04/22/08

The San Diego chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is now working with directly with Mexico's Human Rights Commission, a quasi-governmental group that's independent from but funded by the Mexican government. The ACLU is a very strong supporter of illegal immigration but in the past the only known link between them and the Mexican government was indirect. Any future news report on the ACLU's efforts regarding immigration should mention their new direct link, and if it doesn't please contact the news source's editor. They should also be asked about this at public meetings or whereever else they discuss these issues

This also follows Mexican president Felipe Calderon stating that they're going to use U.S. non-profits to push their agenda inside the U.S.

The release from aclusandiego.org/news_item.php?article_id=000383 is in the extended entry; note that they incorrectly blame border deaths on attempts to enforce our laws, when the actual culprits include those like the ACLU who take every step possible to encourage and enable illegal immigration. They'll be working together to "explore legal actions" against Operation Gatekeeper. They also say that the "ACLU of San Diego is not receiving funding from any Mexican source for its work", hinting that even they know what they're doing is wrong.

Related:
Humane Borders *did* distribute border maps in Mexico
Gil Cedillo, Peter Schey, LULAC, MALDEF, more at Migrant March II
Mexican official on Democrat Enrique Morones' "Migrant March II"

The release follows.
In a historic agreement to pursue joint strategies to protect the human rights of migrants moving across the Mexico-United States border, the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties and the Comision Nacional de Derechos Humanos today signed a document declaring common goals and principles to address the serious human rights issues.

The Memorandum of Agreement between the two organizations charges the parties jointly to explore legal actions to challenge Operation Gatekeeper and other programs that have contributed to migrant deaths, and to educate a transnational audience about the issue of human rights tragedies at the border. More than $30 billion dollars have been spent on Gatekeeper since its inception, but the program has done little to prevent illegal entries—it has simply shifted them to the mountains and deserts east of San Diego, where migrants face much harsher conditions in remote, environmentally hostile areas.

The agreement was developed in reaction to the continually mounting death toll of now more than 5,000 migrants along the border, as well as the challenge of advocating on these issues effectively from just one side of the border. With respect to abuses by federal law enforcement agencies, for example, U.S. federal agencies have acted with immunity and a complete lack of transparency.

Kevin Keenan, Executive Director of the ACLU-San Diego and Dr. Jose Luis Soberanes, President of the Comision, signed the agreement at the "Justice in Mexico: Evaluating National and Local Strategies" conference at the Joan Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice, University of San Diego.

"Through this collaboration we hope to build bridges of understanding and justice, and tear down walls of prejudice and hate," said Dr. Soberanes. "It is intolerable that our two civilized nations have allowed so many deaths of migrants along the border since the adoption of Operation Gatekeeper," said Keenan. "By working together with Mexico's Human Rights Commission, we will hold our governments to account in ways that we could not do alone." David Shirk, Director of the Trans-Border Institute that hosted the conference, said, "We are pleased to serve as the backdrop for the signing of this historic agreement, and hope that this partnership will lead to a reversal of the tragic trends that have plagued our two nations in recent years."

The agreement calls for the organizations to host an invitation-only conference of experts in June to focus on bi-national advocacy strategies for attacking inhumane policies affecting migrants, especially deaths from border crossings; to meet again following the U.S. elections in November to update its plans; to cooperate on other lawsuits, advocacy efforts, and educational campaigns on a case-by-case basis; and to seek funding for these efforts in their respective countries. The ACLU of San Diego is not receiving funding from any Mexican source for its work.

Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon files FBI complaint over Joe Arpaio raids - 04/13/08

In his effort to support illegal immigration and perhaps just gain some fame, Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon now wants the FBI to investigate Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio over whether any civil rights laws were broken civil rights laws during his recent immigration sweeps (link).

In the letter, Gordon race baits, does something no one should do and relies on the characterization of an Arizona Republic editorial ("guilty of looking latino", link), and he also apparently included other news reports which may be biased as well. He includes one example of a suit that's already been filed, and another unverified incident involving one of his own staff members, not exactly an unbiased source.

Meanwhile:

Arpaio said it was ironic that Gordon drafted the letter on the same day that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials from Washington observed his deputies arresting residents and illegal immigrants in Guadalupe and approved of the sheriff's work... ICE officials have said repeatedly that Arpaio is not violating the formal agreement he has with their office allowing sheriff's deputies to enforce immigration laws.

The Arizona chapter of the Anti-Defamation League also wants an investigation, and others mentioned opposing the raids are the American Civil Liberties Union, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (both have indirect links to the Mexican government), the Arizona Ecumenical Council, and the American Jewish Committee (collaborated with the Mexican government).

Barack Obama misleads, smears Middle America - 04/11/08

Speaking in San Francisco at a fundraiser for the wealthy (and in Marin County no less; pictures of his tour here), Barack Obama smeared Pennsylvanians and others by saying:

Otero County, New Mexico capitulates to ACLU, MALDEF - 04/09/08

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund - two groups indirectly linked to the Mexican government - sued New Mexico's Otero County Sheriff's Department over immigration raids that occurred in that county.

James Parks/AFL-CIO, Jennifer Ludden/NPR promote bad, inhumane public policy, illegal immigration - 04/08/08

Jennifer Ludden of National Public Radio (NPR) offers a two-part series about those deported from the U.S. to El Salvador in "Deportee Back Home After Near-Death Trip to U.S." (npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89383189) and "Deportee a Stranger in His Homeland" (npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89431942). To a certain extent they're both cautionary tales illustrating why people shouldn't try to come to the U.S. illegally. And, they're also both largely pointless and shallow character sketches.

MALDEF: Truth in Immigration website - 03/21/08

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), has launched a new website called "Truth in Immigration" (truthinimmigration.org). Per this:

John Trasvina, president of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said Thursday the airwaves are dominated by anti-immigrant sentiment.

Possible Democratic Party immigration "reform" charade: "offer legalization" to become "require" - 02/29/08

A new "confidential" study called "Winning The Immigration Debate" has been released by two groups linked to the Democratic Party: the Center for American Progress (linked to Hillary Clinton and indirectly linked to the Mexican government) and the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform (member groups also have indirect links to the Mexican government) [1].

I haven't seen the study, but while some might be fooled, it's clear that it's just a new attempt to get the same old amnesty. And, their recommendations boil down to simply a rhetorical change, from "offering" a "path to citizenship" to "requiring" illegal aliens to become legalized. That more stern language will, the authors hope, immediately cause millions of U.S. citizens to be more amenable to amnesty. I'm sure they'll be able to fool many people that way, but in the end it's not going to work.

And, wrap your mind around this from the study:

This message places the focus where voters want it, on what's best for the United States, not what we can/should do for illegal immigrants.

Who knew? Of course, this is yet another rhetorical device. Why else include the bit about what voters want? Shouldn't those pushing amnesty want what's best for the U.S. as well? Obviously they don't: their actions have repeatedly shown that they're not thinking of what's best for the U.S. but simply what's best for them and their companies, or their ethnic groups, or their political party.

[1] CCIR is headed by Cecilia Munoz of the National Council of La Raza. They've suggesting going easy on illegal aliens suspected of identity theft, they gave an award to a virulent racist, they fund extremists, and more. At least two members of the CCIR have indirect links to the Mexican government (ICIRR and MALDEF) and one has allegedly collaborated with that government (CHIRLA). And, one of their member groups (ILIR) has received funding from the Irish government.

In other words, no matter what you hear, it's the same old same old.A new "confidential" study called "Winning The Immigration Debate" has been released by two groups linked to the Democratic Party: the Center for American Progress (linked to Hillary Clinton and indirectly linked to the Mexican government) and the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform (member groups also have indirect links to the Mexican government) [1].

I haven't seen the study, but while some might be fooled, it's clear that it's just a new attempt to get the same old amnesty. And, their recommendations boil down to simply a rhetorical change, from "offering" a "path to citizenship" to "requiring" illegal aliens to become legalized. That more stern language will, the authors hope, immediately cause millions of U.S. citizens to be more amenable to amnesty. I'm sure they'll be able to fool many people that way, but in the end it's not going to work.

And, wrap your mind around this from the study:

This message places the focus where voters want it, on what's best for the United States, not what we can/should do for illegal immigrants.

Who knew? Of course, this is yet another rhetorical device. Why else include the bit about what voters want? Shouldn't those pushing amnesty want what's best for the U.S. as well? Obviously they don't: their actions have repeatedly shown that they're not thinking of what's best for the U.S. but simply what's best for them and their companies, or their ethnic groups, or their political party.

[1] CCIR is headed by Cecilia Munoz of the National Council of La Raza. They've suggesting going easy on illegal aliens suspected of identity theft, they gave an award to a virulent racist, they fund extremists, and more. At least two members of the CCIR have indirect links to the Mexican government (ICIRR and MALDEF) and one has allegedly collaborated with that government (CHIRLA). And, one of their member groups (ILIR) has received funding from the Irish government.

In other words, no matter what you hear, it's the same old same old.

Pages