The government recently unveiled a new set of rules outlining better care for immigrants and asylum seekers detained while waiting for their deportation hearings.

The guidelines, issued by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement service (ICE), have been assailed by congressional Republicans, who say they amount to coddling illegal immigrants.

The controversy heated up last week in a hearing called “Holiday on ICE,” held by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, who has referred to the new rules as “a hospitality guideline for illegal immigrants.” He pointed in particular to a new federal facility in Texas that the administration has held up as an example of a less penal approach to non-criminal immigration detainees.

The guards there don’t wear uniforms, and the facility has, as Smith pointed out, a soccer field, volleyball court and cable TV. The $32 million center was built by a private contractor, and ICE claims it will cost less per day to house detainees there than in other facilities.

Smith, as well as the head of the union representing ICE agents, says the new guidelines are too loose on security, and that the government’s focus should be on deporting undocumented immigrants faster. Meanwhile, immigrant rights advocates say detainees who aren’t criminal offenders shouldn’t be treated as such.

So, what are the new guidelines, and what prompted the changes to ICE’s policy?

The government detains about 400,000 illegal immigrants each year. On a given day, roughly 32,000 people are held, about half of them in jails rather than immigrant detention facilities. (PBS’ “Frontline” provides a useful history of changes to U.S. detention policy and an interactive map of ICE detention centers.)

The rules, which are gradually taking effect, are meant to address areas of detention that have long been problematic.

Access to medical care: More than 100 immigrants in detention have died since 2003, many from lack of access to medical care or proper medication. The New York Times reported in 2010 that immigration officials covered up many deaths and that few safeguards for transparency were in place. The new guidelines promise better regular medical care, including mental health and separate standards for women’s health.

Protection against sexual abuse: The American Civil Liberties Union found 185 reported incidents of sexual abuse between 2007 and 2010. Immigration detention centers are not covered by legislation aimed at reducing prison rape, and the new guidelines are supposed to improve supervision of detainees as well as the process for reporting sexual abuse.

Access to family and legal help: Because detainees are spread across hundreds of facilities, often in isolated areas, and frequently transferred, it was difficult for family members or lawyers to remain in close contact with them. A Human Rights Watch report found that 46 percent of detainees were moved at least twice, and 3,600 detainees were transferred 10 times or more.

The new guidelines improve access to bilingual interpreters, and call for better communication with families and legal counsels about transfers. (ICE also issued a directive this year to minimize transfers.) Facilities are “encouraged to provide opportunities for both contact and non-contact visitation.”

Advocates have pointed out that many aspects of new guidelines and the new Texas facility, such as increased freedom of movement and contact visitation, bring the ICE guidelines in line with the standards at many federal correctional facilities, especially low-security ones.

The government plans to build more facilities like the one in Texas, though most detainees will still find themselves housed in less plush environs. Only about 14 percent are expected to be held in new facilities like the one in Texas.

The administration has continued a policy begun under President George W. Bush in which asylum seekers and undocumented immigrants are detained until their court dates. Arrests and deportations have risen steadily since Obama took office.

The administration is billing the rules and new construction as part of a shift in focus away from non-criminal immigrants to catching and deporting criminal immigrants.

by Cora Currier, ProPublica, April 3, 2012, 1:35 p.m.

Image  Courtesy of   CREATISTA / Shutterstock.com

The article The Facts Behind the Government’s New ‘Hospitality’ Guidelines for Immigrant Detainees appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In late October last year, former Texan ranch manager Rep. Lamar Smith introduced the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) to the House of Representatives. The legislation was announced under the banner of being the United States next and ultimate weapon against ‘rogue sites’: offshore web sites in nations less concerned with copyright infringement than the States, but whose location makes them an out-of-reach target for American prosecution.

The Chamber of Commerce phrased their motivation in the following way, to the New York Times: “Rogue web sites that steal America’s innovative and creative products attract more than 53 billion visits a year and threaten more than 19 million American jobs.”

Over 400 businesses and organizations have expressed enthusiasm and support of SOPA, but the most vocal supporters have been the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the Recording Industry Association of America, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

As you could expect, the entertainment industry is on the front line when it comes to seeing this piece of legislation to term and have outspent Internet companies in lobbying effort, funneling more than $91 million into support for SOPA and its related Senate bill the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), which is under similar scrutiny. This is more than the entertainment industry has ever spent on lobbying. Ever.

While anti-piracy laws have been in place for years, many would not be unfamiliar with the idea that efforts to stop illegal downloading of copyrighted content fall short of discouraging the practice. Opponents of SOPA have equally acknowledged that protection of copyrights and trademarks both in and outside of the US is a real concern which should be addressed. However, as lifehacker.com puts it:

[T]he Stop Online Piracy Act, is another one of those bills that sound like it’s going to do something mildly positive but, in reality, has serious potential to negatively change the internet as we know it.

The outcry throughout the digital community has been strong and continues to grow. Netcoalition.com has compiled a list of companies and organizations who oppose SOPA/PIPA  and voice after voice has broken down the issues and dangers involved in the legislation for everyone to understand:

PROTECT IP / SOPA Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

There is even a protest song.

Like the supporters, the opposers have one overall reason against: it will be the end of the Internet as we know it. The effects are expected to ripple through the landscape of electronic content and ruin many of the services which have become deeply ingraned in the 21st century.

Though supporters deny that the impact will be as severe as anticipated, the expected negative impact range from user content websites becoming reliable by default and forced to either censor users or shut down (Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) mentions that sites such as Etsy, Flickr and Vimeo would be blacklisted), to seriously undermining DNS, DNSSEC and other means of internet security to full blown invasion of privacy and threatening freedom of speech online.

In between you have the discouragement of investing in web-related businesses, the downfall of open source software and the dangerous presumption that the United States ‘owns’ the Internet and can overextend its laws beyond its borders.

In mid-November, the nay-sayers were joined by high profile web companies who sent a letter to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, signalling the battle to come. But the months ahead could be a battle uphill; Cnet.com reported that support for PIPA is “remarkably broad, and for SOPA a little less so.”

Apparently, an analysis show that out of 1882 bills introduced in the 112th Congress, PIPA is one out of only 19 which has enjoyed substantial bipartisan support. This has made it one of the most popular bills so far, and while SOPA is newer in comparison, it has been gaining an equal momentum.

PIPA is currently on the fast-track to approval, and SOPA seems to be right behind it. What internet users and web businesses around the world seem to have most animosity towards is the wording of the bill; there are serious concerns that the bill makes overreach a real liability. However, the real scope of the repercussions will have to be assessed once the bill’s approval goes into its final stage, and it is possible that the bleak predictions will be curbed.

The article Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA): 2012’s Biggest Controversy-to-be? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.