Emerald Isle Immigration Center

New York Times

September 18, 2003

Mayor Widens Privacy Rights for Immigrants

By WINNIE HU

nder pressure from immigration groups and the City Council, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg revised his immigration policy yesterday to make it much harder for city agencies to report illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

Mr. Bloomberg had found himself in an increasingly difficult, even untenable, political position since May when he sought to comply with a 1999 federal court ruling that struck down the city's longstanding policy of prohibiting city employees from passing on such immigration information.

Mr. Bloomberg, noting that the ruling made the "don't tell" policy illegal, had instead replaced it with a "don't ask" policy that restricted most city employees from asking about a person's immigration status. The order largely exempted police officers, though the police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, later tried to clarify the department's position to reassure immigrants.

Many City Council members and immigrant groups had criticized the mayor's policy as a step backward and asserted that it would discourage illegal immigrants from seeking medical assistance and other basic city services. Meanwhile, Mr. Bloomberg's standing with Hispanic voters plummeted, even as he tried to win their support in various ways, including visiting the Dominican Republic and dancing the merengue.

But yesterday, he received a much different reception as many of these same critics came to City Hall to praise his efforts to expand protections for immigrants.

Using more than a dozen ceremonial pens that he passed out to representatives of the very groups that had been criticizing him, the mayor signed a new executive order on immigration. It established a broad new privacy policy that would prohibit city workers in most cases from giving out information about not just a person's immigration status, but also sexual orientation, income tax records and welfare assistance, among other things. It also applies to law enforcement officers, except in cases involving criminal activity and terrorism.

"It gives assurance to all law-abiding New Yorkers — whether you're an immigrant, a victim of domestic violence, or any taxpayer — that the confidential information you give to the city will stay with the city," the mayor said, flanked by Mr. Kelly and Council Speaker Gifford Miller.

Michael A. Cardozo, the city's corporation counsel, said that by expanding the privacy policy to cover other kinds of personal information, the new immigration policy could still comply with the 1999 ruling.

"The court had said you can't have a policy just for immigration," he said. "And if in fact you had an overall confidentiality policy — not just for immigration, but for domestic violence, for tax issues, for sexual assault — that it would be a very different situation, and they did not rule that that would be illegal. They left that question open."

Stephen Yale-Loehr, who teaches immigration law at Cornell Law School, concurred with several other legal experts that the federal court "hinted that it might rule a different way" if the city were to adopt a broader policy that protected confidential information generally.

"The mayor's new order appears to be an effort to do just that," he said. "It remains to be seen whether the new order adequately protects immigrants and others, and whether the federal government will challenge the new city order."

Dean Boyd, a spokesman for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said that his agency's primary concern with the city's new policy was whether it would affect their enforcement efforts. "If local law enforcement encounters individuals who are in this country illegally, particularly if they are engaged in criminal activity, it is important that they coordinate with us," he said.

Under the executive order, the "don't tell" provisions specifically do not apply to people suspected of criminal or terrorist activities.

Immigrant advocates said yesterday that they had met repeatedly with the mayor's staff to negotiate an immigration policy that they could all support. Mr. Miller and 36 council members had even endorsed a competing bill, in case talks failed.

Councilman Hiram Monserrate, the bill's sponsor and one of the mayor's most outspoken critics on this issue, said yesterday that while his bill had offered broader protections for immigrants, the mayor's order had incorporated the most important elements.

"I think that we are in a much better place," he said, "because in essence, this policy has a "don't ask, don't tell" provision which has never existed in the City of New York."

New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com

'Don't-ask' policy will hurt city of immigrants

Thursday, June 5th, 2003

"Executive Order 34 finds the right balance between encouraging immigrants to seek vital city services," Mayor Bloomberg said in a written statement, "while preventing city agencies and police from becoming an arm of the INS, which will never happen under my administration."

Sounds good. And the mayor, of course, can say whatever he wants. But something is sure: His words won't change reality.

His new confidentiality policy for city agencies, contained in Executive Order 34, is certain to scare the hell out of undocumented immigrants. And to have a negative impact on the city as a whole.

"With more than 8 million people, our city is only as safe and healthy as each of the individuals who call it home," said Queens City Councilman Hiram Monserrate, one of several Council members and immigration advocates who Tuesday staged a protest on the steps of City Hall.

The new policy, made public by Bloomberg on Friday (although he had quietly signed it on May 13), revokes Executive Order 124, issued by Mayor Koch 13 years ago and strongly supported by the Dinkins and Giuliani administrations.

It prohibited city agencies from revealing immigration-related information to federal authorities, unless the immigrant had committed a crime.

The new order, with its "don't-ask" policy when someone is applying for a service or benefit and immigration status is not relevant to determining the person's eligibility, takes away some important protections.

"The omission of any limits on police inquiries regarding immigration status, as well as provisions to prevent sharing of information by city workers, will radically change the city's relationship to its millions of immigrant residents," said Moisés Pérez, executive director of Alianza Dominicana,

Safety repercussions

That is, forget about immigrants reporting crimes and fires, or seeking public health services. And get ready for poorer public health and impaired safety in the city.

Monserrate, a former cop, believes the new policy is completely counterproductive.

"In a city that is 40% foreign-born, it is essential for these communities not to be afraid to access city services that stop disease from spreading, keep crime levels at historic lows and put an end to discrimination," he said.

It is public knowledge that violence against Arab and Muslim immigrants increased sharply after 9/11. Even worse, most victims already were scared enough not to go to the authorities. With the new relaxed confidentiality rules, even fewer people will come forward, and more criminals will remain on the loose. Not good for anybody.

"We strongly oppose any cooperation between the NYPD or city employees and the INS," said Sarah Leah Whitson, of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in New York. "Such cooperation would be a great disservice to the immigrant community in general and the Arab community specifically.

"To face deportation because they called the police seeking help is wrong."

Few immigrants, of course, will be willing to risk it. And the whole city suffers for it. Even if Mayor Bloomberg does not think so.

· Diversity Visa (Lottery) Update

· Immigration Law - Update

· Immigration - Questions & Answers

· Immigration Links

Top