Joseph Law Firm, P.C.

Joseph Law Firm Awards and Honors:

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Mesbah Habibi, 17, was living with a Jefferson County family and attending Columbine High School as a junior. He seemed to fit in, taking part in several student clubs and teams.

He went missing Monday. On Tuesday, he e-mailed his host family and the American Councils for International Education, the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit organization that brought him to the U.S.

"It was pretty laconic," Benjamin Gaylord, ACIE's program manager for secondary school programs, said of the e-mail. "Essentially, 'I'm OK. I'm safe, and I'm in Canada, and I'll talk to you later,' or something like that."

Students stand a better chance of winning asylum in Canada than in the U.S., said Jeff Joseph, a Denver immigration lawyer. Only one in 12 asylum requests is accepted here, compared with about half in Canada, he said.

The two countries have similar provisions in their laws, but Canadian judges are more lenient, Joseph said.

Under a treaty provision, a person who is turned down for asylum in Canada or the U.S. is barred from seeking asylum in the other country.

Habibi was one of six Afghan exchange students who went to Canada from the U.S., apparently to seek asylum there. Gaylord declined to say where the others had been staying in the U.S. or what part of Afghanistan they were from.

Gaylord said that Habibi was not from "one of the places (in Afghanistan) that's more in the news."

"That's the odd thing to me. All the kids that had crossed to Canada had been very active in their high schools," Gaylord said.

Among the things students give up by going to Canada is a ticket back to Afghanistan, which was part of the exchange program, Gaylord said.

The students who left were among 40 who came to the U.S. this year under an exchange program funded by the U.S. State Department. In addition to travel, they get a $125-a-month stipend.

By going to Canada, the students violated the terms of their U.S. visas. Their names have been turned over to the Department of Homeland Security, and they are subject to immediate deportation if they return, said Nicole Thompson, a State Department spokeswoman.

Habibi arrived in August 2007. He was scheduled to return to Afghanistan in June.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Four weeping members of an Armenian family that has fought for five years to stay in America were taken into custody Thursday morning for deportation.

Ruben, Gevorg, Meri and Hayk Sargsyan were incarcerated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in Aurora over the objections of their attorney, Jeff Joseph .

Joseph said that immigration officials are ignoring a 2001 law creating special visas for immigrants who have been victims of human trafficking or violence.

Joseph said he has asked for help from U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, and if that fails, he plans to take the matter to federal court."This is an absolutely overzealous interpretation of the law," Joseph said.

He has filed for the special visas for the Sargsyans, claiming that they were victimized when they came to the United States with student visas in 1999.

Immigration officials have told The Denver Post that the family's legal challenges have been exhausted, and it's time for them to return to Armenia.

The Sargsyans came to the Western Slope town of Ridgway after the eldest Sargsyan daughter, Nvart, married American Vaughn Huckfeldt. The Sargsyans allege that Huckfeldt abused his wife and took money from a number of other Armenians in the family's hometown of Yerevan, promising he would obtain visas for them. He left with the money, the Sargsyans said, and those who had been duped blamed the Sargsyans for Huckfeldt's actions.

Huckfeldt eventually obtained visas for the Sargsyan family but reported them for being in the country on the wrong type of visa after Nvart filed for divorce.

The Sargsyans say they fear persecution - even execution - by the Russian Mafia if they are sent back to Armenia.

Joseph said that when his clients turned themselves over Thursday, officials refused to look at a petition signed by 1,500 Ouray County residents who urged that the Sargsyans be allowed to stay in the U.S.

Pete Whiskeman, a Ridgway businessman who spearheaded the petition drive, said the family has done everything in its power to conform with the law.

Ridgway - Members of an Armenian family who fought deportation for the past 2 1/2 years with the aid of their Ridgway neighbors have won rare visas and are on the path to citizenship.

"We are euphoric," said Pete Whiskeman, a Ridgway businessman who spearheaded the $150,000 fundraising effort to help the family in this single-stoplight town of 4,000.

That money - along with an outpouring of community support - paid the legal bills and drew political attention to the plight of the five members of the Sargsyan family.

"I can't even tell you in words," Nvart Idinyan Sargsyan said Tuesday. "This is so incredible to finally be on the right side."

The family ran afoul of immigration laws and had been threatened with deportation since the eldest daughter's then-husband brought them to the Ridgway area on student visas in 1999. Vaughn Huckfeldt, who the family said had presented himself as a wealthy American minister in their hometown of Yerevan, had allegedly bilked other Armenians by promising to obtain visas for them, the family said.

The family was threatened by those who lost money after Huckfeldt married Nvart, left Armenia and failed to deliver the visas, the Sargsyans said.

The Sargsyans - parents, Susan and Ruben; daughter Meri; and sons Hayk and Gevorg - quickly became valued members of the Ridgway community after they arrived with a single dollar bill and the few possessions they could carry. When Nvart divorced Huckfeldt in 2000, he turned the family in for having improper visas.

The family was then victimized by an immigration attorney who has since been disbarred.

As the family prepared for deportation in 2004, Whiskeman learned of their plight. He began a fund drive that ranged from dollar donations at a bake sale to $15,000 given by an anonymous out-of-state donor.

Ridgway students wrote letters to politicians, and more than 60 community members braved a winter storm in late 2004 to travel to Aurora and rally support when the family was jailed at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center.

The family suffered numerous other setbacks in the fight for legal residency, including the death of Nvart's second husband, Max Noland, in a construction accident.

Nvart moved to the Fort Collins area last year but said she still considers Ouray County her home. Hayk and Gevorg are attending the University of Colorado. Meri works for a Ridgway bank, and her parents still work odd jobs around the community and are hoping to open an Armenian restaurant.

Nvart plans to apply for citizenship when she is eligible in three years. The other family members will be eligible to apply for permanent residency in a year and for citizenship in five years.

The Sargsyans' visas, granted on the basis of giving them relief from "human trafficking," have been issued in only 629 cases since 2001.

Jeff Joseph, the immigration attorney who helped obtain the Sargsyans' visas, said he has never handled another immigration case where the federal government threw up so many roadblocks.

Just last month, CU sophomore Gevorg Sargsyan was studying for chemistry midterms and on his way to becoming a doctor.

Now he and his family are locked in a federal detention center in Aurora, awaiting deportation to their native Armenia, where they say they are marked for death by the Russian Mafia.

An immigration judge ordered the deportation after finding that the Sargsyans entered the United States fraudulently using student visas. An appeal failed in June, and while the family continues to pursue legal challenges, Gevorg and his father, brother and sister could be removed from the country any day.

"As of right now, there are final orders against them, and (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is free to move them today, tomorrow morning or in a month depending on how quickly they can get the travel plans in order," said Corina Almeida, the agency's lead counsel in Denver.

The Sargsyans' story -- and the intertwined web of legal proceedings that will decide their fate -- is complex and marked by contradictory moments of hope, fraud, inspiration and betrayal.

The family came to the United States in 1999 to flee death threats in Armenia after an American then married to Gevorg's sister Nvart allegedly bilked as many as 15 families in their hometown of Yerevan out of more than $1,000 each -- the equivalent of three years' salary.

Vaughn Huckfeldt -- who posed as a wealthy American minister -- promised to obtain U.S. visas for the group but took the money without delivering the papers. Angry families blamed the Sargsyans and called on the Russian Mafia to collect the debt.

The Sargsyans sold everything -- their house, their car, their wedding rings and jewelry -- and escaped to America on student visas that Huckfeldt assured them would be valid. They settled in the western Colorado town of Ridgway, where neighbors quickly accepted them as intelligent, hardworking and kind -- "the kind of people who make this country what it is," as one supporter described the family.

Gevorg, a soccer player and honors student, learned English quickly and graduated second in his class at Ridgway High School. He later made the dean's list at CU.

Nvart, however, suffered in what her lawyer describes as an abusive marriage to Huckfeldt and filed for divorce. Huckfeldt then turned in the family to immigration authorities.

They were ordered to report to a government office Nov. 4 and have been detained ever since. Huckfeldt has reportedly left the country.

Jeff Joseph, a Denver immigration attorney representing the Sargsyans, has filed motions to re-open their cases on several grounds that he says could halt their deportation if allowed to run their course.

Joseph contends that because of Huckfeldt's exploitation and abuse, the Sargsyans were "basically held in indentured servitude," making them eligible for "T" and "U" visas, granted respectively to victims of human trafficking and victims of crime. Those applications are still pending.

Nvart has since been granted permanent residency under the Violence Against Women Act, Joseph said. She married another U.S. citizen, who agreed to adopt Gevorg and his brother Hayk, who in theory should be able to stay in the country as the couple's children. Those immigration papers are also pending.

The family lost its case because of technical, narrow readings of laws that Congress intended to be interpreted broadly to give crime victims "every consideration and protection possible," Joseph said.

"My opinion is that if the government follows the law, their chances are excellent," he said. "The problem is I don't think the government is following either the spirit or the letter of the law."

The ICE's Almeida said she could not comment on visa applications specific to the Sargsyans' case.

She acknowledged that the family has received an unusual amount of community support but said the government does not play favorites or make exceptions based on public opinion. Despite all the publicity, the case is really not much different from numerous others, she said.

"They had their day in court; there was due process," she said. "The judge considered every single piece of evidence and made a determination based on our law that they did not qualify to remain in the country."

The law is forgiving, Almeida added, and nothing will prevent the Sargsyans from coming back to America if they apply through the proper legal channels.

That's no comfort to Colin Lacy, who befriended Gevorg Sargsyan as an eight-grader in Ridgway and is now a sophomore at CU.

"I think it takes six weeks to get visas once they get back home," he said. "And they won't last six weeks; they'll be lucky to last a couple of hours. They all say that without a doubt they will be killed."

The situation is weighing on Gevorg, who was optimistic at first but seemed worse a week ago when Lacy last spoke with him. The family is incarcerated with violent criminals and sleeps in shifts as a safety precaution, Lacy said.

Lacy describes Gevorg as his best friend, a fast learner who in a few years learned to speak English better than many Americans and broke down in tears after winning a high-school debate tournament because he was "so happy to be here doing good things."

Ridgway -- a small Western Slope town of 750 -- has come together in support of the Sargsyans, defending the family as their own. The community has raised more than $15,000 in legal fees, and Lacy recently led a peaceful protest of their incarceration at the Aurora detention center.

Their best hopes now lie in sending letters to politicians and hoping someone will intervene -- although in an election year nobody has wanted to appear soft on illegal immigration, Lacy said.

"I still like to keep some hope because ever since you're a little kid, you're preached to about how this country defends freedom and liberty," he said. "I'd like to see that happen so it's not just propaganda."

I am dating a woman who is 21 years old. She came here on a visa from Brazil with her mother when she was 12. Soon after, the visa expired but they stayed here. I have been dating her for a few years now, and she has been pursuing her education. She speaks fluent English and excels in school. She wants to go on to medical school but fears she will not be able to afford it due to not being able to get a student loan since she is not a citizen. We have talked about marriage and have looked everywhere and asked everyone about how to change her status. No one seemed to have a clear-cut answer. I was wondering if you could shed some light on her situation.

Jeff Joseph, an immigration attorney based in Denver, said that according to U.S. immigration law - section 245(a), specifically - if a person marries a U.S. citizen after having made a legal entry into the United States, that person can adjust status to legal permanent resident and would be forgiven any violations relating to status.

"So in other words, if she entered legally as a tourist, albeit 20 years ago, if she marries a U.S. citizen, under the law she would be forgiven for overstaying her visa," he said. There are some penalties and grounds of inadmissibility or denial of her green card application that could be triggered, such as having a criminal history or leaving the United States and re-entering illegally. But if she has no criminal history, no illegal entries, no prior deportations or exclusions and no false claims to citizenship - a perfect record, that is, other than the visa overstay - she should be eligible to receive a green card.

Moreover, filing the application on her behalf by her U.S. citizen husband would entitle her to legal work authorization. That, in turn, would permit her to obtain a Social Security card, which would help her qualify for student aid to attend college. So she has a path out of her immigration troubles, since she initially made a legal entry into the United States. A common misconception among many people is that simply marrying a U.S. citizen automatically entitles a person to a green card. That is not so, Joseph said. It only applies to people who legally entered the country and have no other bad marks on their record.

Those who entered the country illegally without papers, even if they marry a U.S. citizen, must return to their home countries to apply for a green card, and then may face barriers to re-entering the United States. They may also have their applications rejected outright because of their illegal presence in the United States, he said.

I entered the United States without immigration inspection. I spent seven years in the country. While in the United States I attended York College in Queens. I was never arrested or in trouble with the law. I left in 2004 and went to Canada legally. I want to get married to my girlfriend of three years, who is an American citizen. If I get married in Canada, can I come back legally to the United States?

For anyone who entered the country unlawfully or "without inspection," a three- or 10-year bar from re-entering the United States does apply, said Mario Russell, senior immigration attorney for Catholic Charities in the Archdiocese of New York. You can seek a waiver to the ban after you marry, file an application for a green card and have your application processed through a consular office (which will take some time in itself), but the outcome of your request is uncertain. You must demonstrate that your continued absence from the United States will be a hardship on your U.S. citizen spouse - usually financial or due to health reasons.

"The granting or denial of those waivers is really very fact-driven and seems to change depending on the consular post," Russell said.

Some posts are known to be especially tough, while others are somewhat more lenient, although in general obtaining the hardship waiver is not easy. The bar to re-entry is three years if you were here illegally between 181 and 364 days and is 10 years if you here more than that. If you were here less than 181 days, there is no bar.

Regarding proposed immigration bills in Washington, Russell said it is too early to say what if anything will finally come out of Washington. "We have just no idea what's going to be worked out," he said. "I would venture to say it's counting way too many chickens before anything is hatched." Send questions to Bart Jones, Immigration Q&A, Newsday, 235 Pinelawn Rd., Melville NY 11747-4250.

Questions may be e-mailed to bart.jones@newsday.com. Include a daytime phone number. Questions will not be answered personally but only in this column.

My niece is a U.S. citizen who married her longtime boyfriend, whom we believe to be here illegally. He came to this country with his mother when he was 8 years old, and he doesn't know if the proper paperwork was filed for him to enter the country. He is now 28, and they have two children together. He has a valid Social Security card and pays taxes. His Social Security card is stamped "not for work." We don't understand how he was able to get this card and a valid driver's license, if he is illegally here. He works hard to provide for his family and needs to get working papers and residency. Any lawyer they contacted seems to want big money up front, or they never return phone calls. Any advice?

One of the keys to your question is whether he came to the United States legally, said Cleveland-based immigration attorney David Leopold. If he did, then his wife can file a petition for him to obtain a green card, since she is a U.S. citizen and they have a valid marriage.

If he did not come to the United States legally, then the key question is whether he had any type of petition filed for him before April 30, 2001. That is the cut-off date for a provision of an immigration law known as 245i, which is a kind of "grandfather" clause.

In general, this law allows an alien who is undocumented to apply for adjustment of status upon payment of a $1,000 surcharge. The previously filed petitions could include things such as an employer filing an immigration application on his behalf or a sibling who was born here filing one for him.

However, if he entered the country illegally and no petition was filed for him before April 30, 2001, the situation will be much more difficult, Leopold said. He will likely have to return to his home country and apply for a waiver of a 10-year bar to readmission that applies to people who have been out of status for more than a year.

Obtaining the waiver can be difficult, Leopold said. He added that while he could not say with certainty how your niece's husband obtained the documents you mention, if he came to the United States illegally, it would have been extremely difficult if not impossible to obtain valid documents in his name.

My friend came to the United States in 1998 with a tourist visa that was valid for five years. She returned to Ecuador and came back to this country in 2000 due to emotional and physical spousal abuse, for which she has documented proof. She is currently employed as a nanny. Can she apply for amnesty due to spousal abuse? Can she apply for a work visa?

There are only two ways your friend can obtain legal status here, said Denver immigration attorney Jeff Joseph.

If she was abused or subjected to extreme mental cruelty at the hands of someone who is or was a U.S. citizen or a legal permanent resident, and the crime committed was a violation of U.S. law, she can apply for an immigrant visa and permanent residence under the Violence Against Women Act. If the assailant does not fit into that category, she cannot apply.

The other option is to apply for a "U" visa. This visa is for anyone who is the victim of a crime that violates U.S. law, whether it was committed by a U.S. citizen or green card holder or not. However, a key provision of this visa is that a U.S. law enforcement agency must determine that the victim's assistance is critical to the prosecution or investigation of the crime, and must officially sign on to the person's application, indicating this. Joseph said that happens only in unusual circumstances.

In terms of applying for a "work visa," he said there is no such thing as a general work visa. You can apply for certain visas for specific jobs, such as ones for professionals or ones for agricultural workers, but there is no general one. Send questions to Bart Jones, Immigration Q&A, Newsday, 235 Pinelawn Rd., Melville NY 11747-4250.

Questions may be e-mailed to bart.jones@newsday.com. Include a daytime phone number. Questions will not be answered personally but only in this column.

A report released today shows huge differences among the nation’s 208 immigration judges in how often they turn down requests for asylum, with Denver’s three judges falling roughly in the middle.

Immigrants can ask for asylum as a way to stay legally in the U.S. because they fear they will face persecution for political, religious or other reasons if they return to their home country.

Judges’ denial rates ranged from 10 percent of all requests to 98 percent, according to the study by Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a data research organization based at Syracuse University in New York. TRAC examined all asylum decisions by judges from 1994 to 1999 and from 2000 through the first few months of 2005.

Denver Judge James Vandello denied asylum to 64 percent of cases he heard from 2000 to 2005. Judge David Cordova rejected 51.8 percent, and Judge Donn Livingston turned down 51.6 percent.

Denver immigration attorney Jeff Joseph called the disparity "a huge problem" for those trying to escape danger in their home countries.

"Something has to be done to better standardize the process," he said. "Frankly, we’re fortunate in Denver to have judges that aren’t denying nine out every 10 cases."

The Executive Office for Immigration Review, which oversees the immigration court system, told TRAC that because of EOIR’s "strict no-interview policy" it would have no comment. The Justice Department, EOIR’s parent agency, was provided a brief summary of some of the report’s findings and also declined to comment, TRAC said.

The immigration court system’s goal is to provide "fair, expeditious and uniform application of the nation’s immigration laws in all cases," according to EOIR’s mission statement.

But immigration attorneys and groups that advocate for asylum applicants say the denial rates show that the court is failing in its goal.
"Uniformly applying the law sounds good, but it’s a lofty goal," said Catherine Chan, a Denver immigration attorney. "The reality is, each case is so different. And each judge is different."

Regina Germain, legal director of Rocky Mountain Survivors Center and an expert on asylum law, said she has seen firsthand the disparities in judges’ decisions.

"I’ve practiced in jurisdictions where it was hard to win an asylum case, and places where it was easier to win," she said. "It basically boils down to the individual immigration judge."

Recently, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales criticized some immigration judges, saying their conduct "can aptly be described as intemperate or even abusive and whose work must improve."

Joseph said many judges are unsympathetic because they are former government attorneys who are accustomed to prosecuting immigrants, unlike private lawyers who have experience defending them.

"When the government recruits from its own, you’re not going to have diverse representation," he said. "In my opinion, it should be half and half."

The report showed that an important factor in winning asylum was having a lawyer. While 64 percent of applicants with attorneys were denied asylum, the denial rate for unrepresented immigrants was 93 percent.

Chan said asylum applicants face many obstacles when representing themselves, including language barriers and mental health problems from torture, rape and other forms of persecution.

The report also found that asylum seekers from certain countries tend to be more successful. Since 2000, more than 80 percent of Mexican, El Salvadoran and Haitian applicants have been denied asylum. Less than 30 percent of applicants from Afghanistan and Burma were rejected.

Chan says U.S. politics plays a role in whether someone is granted asylum.
"Granting asylum is a political statement. Taking in Cubans or Chinese is a reflection of our foreign policy," she said.

Anti-sanctuary law sets off consular tiff Mexican's criticism of Colorado ban
called 'meddling' in U.S. affairs

DENVER A newly signed Colorado law prohibiting "sanctuary" cities has ignited a feud between a state lawmaker and the Mexican consul.

State Sen. Tom Wiens, a Republican, fired off a letter Friday accusing Mexican Consul General Juan Marcos Gutierrez of interfering in U.S. policy-making after the consul general criticized the anti-sanctuary measure.

He should apologize for meddling in our affairs," said Mr. Wiens, the bill's sponsor.

Mr. Gutierrez responded with a letter yesterday arguing that the law had raised concerns about the safety of Mexican citizens living in Colorado.

"First, I respectfully acknowledge that I do not share your opinion about concerns regarding disregard for the rights of a sovereign nation to pass and enforce its own laws," Mr. Gutierrez said in the letter. "[The law] is aimed to have an impact on immigrants and their migration status, which obligates us to fulfill our function of protecting the rights of our nationals while the law is being applied."

Last week, Mr. Gutierrez said he worried that the law would result in racial profiling of Hispanics, regardless of their immigration status. He said the consul had received a number of calls from people worried about the law's effect.

"What this bill does is allow each and every employee of local government to build their own policy based on their own beliefs," Mr. Gutierrez said Thursday. "This is leaving a window open for any employee who has a personal agenda on immigration to make a decision based on racial profiling."

His remarks infuriated Mr. Wiens, who said the consul general had impugned the integrity of Colorado officers by "insinuating that our law enforcement community would put their alleged personal agendas above the rule of law."

"That might be what they do in Mexico, but that's not how they do it here," Mr. Wiens said.

The anti-sanctuary bill, signed Monday by Colorado Gov. Bill Owens, abolishes the so-called "sanctuary city" policies that prohibit law enforcement officers from asking suspected illegal aliens about their residency status. Under such policies, only those arrested on felony charges may be asked whether they are living in the United States legally.

Many major U.S. cities, and at least three in Colorado Denver, Boulder and Durango have approved some sort of sanctuary protection for illegal aliens.

Under the new law, state and local police would be required to alert Immigration and Customs Enforcement after arresting a suspected illegal alien on felony or misdemeanor charges. The law would not apply to traffic stops or domestic violence, primarily to encourage women to report physical abuse in the latter case.

The law wasn't considered controversial at the time of its passage: Senate Bill 90 was approved unanimously in the state Senate last month and overwhelmingly in the House. Both chambers are narrowly controlled by Democrats.

Jeff Joseph, a Denver immigration lawyer, said he worried that the law would erode trust between police and the state's ethnic communities. He also predicted an increase in civil rights lawsuits if police mistake Hispanic citizens for illegal aliens.

"If you pull someone over, and they've forgotten their ID, but they have an accent and brown skin, there's going to be racial profiling involved," Mr. Joseph said.

The man accused of fatally shooting a Colorado Springs police officer Wednesday, had a run-in with immigration officials two years ago, according to The Denver Post.

Thirty-year-old Jereme Lamberth has been arrested for the shooting death of officer Jared Jensen.

Federal immigration officials tried to deport Jereme Lamberth in 2004, when he was about to be released from prison, according to the Post report. However, a federal judge in Colorado, whose name is not being released, granted Lamberth US citizenship because his father is from the United States.

Lamberth was born in Germany 30 years ago, to a German-born mother and an American military father.

9News spoke to Jeff Joseph, an immigration attorney who says the Judge made a legal decision in this case, based on immigration laws. Joseph has not seen this specific case, but says a federal judge would have no choice but to make a decision on citizenship based on the law.

"We're talking about a federal judge here, a federal immigration judge," Joseph says. "He wouldn't have 'willy nilly' decided this is a nice guy, 'I think I'm going to give him a break here.' It doesn't work that way. A federal judge is bound by the law."

Officer Jensen came across Lamberth Wednesday and recognized him as a fugitive. Lamberth was wanted for the attempted murder of his sister.

On Thursday, Lamberth's sister, 32-year-old Melanie Schweinhardt, said she hopes her brother gets the death penalty.

Rumors dog new 'sanctuary law' - Officials try to calm immigrants' fears over possible arrest

A new law that requires police to report any illegal immigrant they arrest to federal immigration authorities is causing confusion and widespread rumors in the Hispanic immigrant community.

Local Spanish-language radio stations have been inundated with calls this week from people concerned about the law, which was approved by the legislature and signed by Gov. Bill Owens.

Yesabeth Quezada, a disc jockey for La Buena Onda (1150-AM), said her station has received more than 100 calls from people worried about being questioned by police as they go about their day-to-day business, such as going to the library, sending their children to school, or applying for medical benefits.

Juan Marcos Gutierrez, Mexican general consul of Denver, said his office also has received numerous calls.
This concern comes just weeks after a nationwide roundup by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials of more than 1,110 workers for a wood pallet maker, including 38 locally, prompting more rumors of continued workplace raids and even checkpoints along major highways.

Gutierrez said most of the recent worries have been due to misinformation and confusion about the new "sanctuary law."
And much of it is because of reports about earlier versions of the bill that created the law.

At one time, the bill would have required any local official or government employee to tell ICE agents about anyone they suspected to be an illegal immigrant.

The final version of the bill - the one signed into law by Owens - was amended to apply just to police who arrest someone for offenses other than minor traffic violations and domestic violence.

The latter exception is meant to encourage victims to report abuse without having to worry about immigration hassles.
"The focus is when someone is arrested, not before they are arrested," said Tom Wiens, R-Castle Rock, co-sponsor of the bill.
Jeff Joseph, a Denver immigration attorney, said the potential for racial profiling is cause for concern, however.
"If you become a criminal suspect because of your accent or the color of your skin, you can bet that there will be lawsuits," he said.

Countered Wiens: "Enforcement of the laws of the U.S. and Colorado is in no way abuse."
Still, Joseph says the new law may have negative consequences.

"It has the potential to shift police priorities to go after people suspected of being in the country illegally, which are civil violations," he said. "In general, the new bill is a bad idea all around."

Gutierrez advises illegal immigrants to know their rights, including their right to notify the Mexican consulate if they are arrested so an attorney and family members can be contacted.

Gutierrez said the consulate receives an average of 40 calls and faxes each month informing it of arrests of Mexican nationals.

No matter what their immigration views, Coloradans seem to fall into two camps on the latest reform proposal: those unhappy with it, and those just confused by it.

"This paints the picture that all you have to do is sneak in the back door and we'll eventually give you amnesty," said Fred Elbel, of Defend Colorado Now, which waged a failed constitutional amendment campaign that led then-Gov. Bill Owens to call a special legislative session on immigration reform.

"I think our senators are trying to give their corporate interests an unending supply of cheap foreign labor at the expense of the American worker," he said.

The Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition doesn't like the proposal, either, but for different reasons.

"We find the elimination of the family immigration system, the creation of a new temporary worker program that would create a permanent underclass of workers with few rights and no ability to become citizens, and the limitations on due process to be anti-family, anti-worker and fundamentally un-American," the coalition said in a statement.

Jeff Joseph, one of Denver's top immigration attorneys, said he doesn't like the emphasis on job skills and education over family ties in the granting of visas. He said that smacks of elitism.

"I'm not making a value judgment, but this takes people with less education to the end of the line," he said.

Francisco Granados, of the Congregation Building Communities organization in Greeley, doesn't like the proposal's guest worker plan, which would create two- year visas that could be renewed three times. Granados said that doesn't reflect how illegal immigrants actually live and work.

"Most people I know work for farms," Granados said. "They don't want to stay here. They want to work during the farm season and go home. My question (about the proposed reform) would be, can they go home during those two years or do they have to stay here?"

Juliet Gilbert, a Denver immigration attorney who represents children, said the proposal raises more questions than it answers.

Would each person in a family of illegal immigrants have to pay $5,000 in fines for a new "Z Visa," or would that fine be for an entire family? Would immigrants be required to apply for legal permanent residency after a certain period of time, or could they simply keep renewing their Z visas?

* "The amnesty plan will be a slap in the face to hard working Americans and those who have come here to work legally. The president is so desperate for a legacy and a domestic policy win that he is willing to sell out the American people and our national security."

* "He remains concerned that our borders are protected and current laws are enforced, but he looks forward to reviewing any legislation that could provide a common-sense solution to the 12 million or so illegal immigrants . . . in the United States."

* "I believe our top priorities when considering immigration reform should be the security of the American people and the security of U.S. borders. It is also vital that we have a tamper-proof ID system, and a new worker program to maintain a vibrant economy."

* "She is pleased the Senate is moving forward with a comprehensive immigration reform proposal that is similar to the one she is supporting in the House."

* "The congressman is very disppointed in it. He thinks it's a missed opportunity. There are a lot of elements relating to amnesty and that's what he is concerned about." Chris Harvin, spokesman for Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado Springs

* "I support enforcing our borders, improving the employer verification program, and I continue to oppose any plan to grant amnesty to illegal aliens."

* "We must enforce current immigration laws . . . crack down on employers who hire illegal workers, improve the process for temporary work visas, and provide an earned pathway to legal status. The Senate bill . . . seems to address many of these issues."

* "It looks as if it is a watered down version of last year's Senate bill that didn't gain any traction. We're basically saying to Mexico 'flee to the U.S. as soon as possible.' "

* "When a system is broken like this, I think you have two choices. You can either enforce the law you've got or reform the law you've got. I think the feds have chosen largely to do neither and what we need is actually both. So, I'm glad that there are signs of progress in Washington."

* "The Senate deal fails the test of securing the borders first and foremost. It concerns me that we have amnesty by another name for 10 to 20 million law breakers."

In a debate at Boetcher Auditorium on U.S. immigration law, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R., Colo.) blamed the immigration problems on the "broken" enforcement of immigration policy.

He outlined his four-point plan for immigration control, which includes securing the borders, establishing a genuine guest worker program and internal enforcement of immigration laws.

Tancredo, who is chair of the Congressional Immigration Caucus, has reservation of President Bush's recent proposal to amend immigration laws on the issue.

"The president is looking to trade out his law abiding constituents for people that have blatantly disregarded those same laws to further their homelands agenda," said Tancredo recently.

Joseph, who chairs the Colorado chapter of American Immigration Lawyers Association, focused on other aspects of the immigration issue.

He depicted the current immigrant workforce as "crucial" for the American economy.

Joseph said, "[The] enforcement policy of immigration is not in line with reality."

Joseph said the two types of temporary work visas available to foreigners (H2-A and H2-B) are not suitable for the timeframes of some jobs such as those in construction.

Joseph criticized Bush's immigration proposal for not giving incentive for illegal residents to register and become legal residents.

"The president's proposal provides a solution for the temporary worker shortage, but fails to recognize that there are 9.3 million undocumented immigrants with long, deep family roots in our communities," said Joseph.

Concerning the cultural significance of the flood of immigrants into the United States, Tancredo criticized the "cult of multiculturalism" and questioned the principle of "diversity [as] the one common goal."

Joseph responded to this argument with, "America was founded by, created by and is run by a nation of immigrants."

The debate was moderated by DU Vice Provost for Internationalization, Ved Nanda.

O'REILLY: Impact segment tonight, as we reported last night, there's a nationwide manhunt for 19-year old illegal alien Raoul Garcia Gomez, who allegedly murdered Denver police detective Donald Young and wounded Detective John Bishop last weekend.Gomez has been cited three times for traffic violations. He had no car insurance, carried a Mexican license. Nevertheless, authorities kicked him back on the street because of Denver's sanctuary policy that orders the police not to report illegal aliens to the feds unless a crime's involved.

Well, now, there is a brutal crime. Detective Young will be buried tomorrow. And there's anger in the Mile High City.

Joining us now from Denver is Jeff Joseph, an immigration attorney. Today in The Rocky Mountain News, there was an editorial saying, look, we're not going to -- we don't want the city to change its policy. Call it sanctuary, you can call it whatever you want. That doesn't alert the feds unless the person commits a pretty heinous crime. Do you agree with that policy?

JEFF JOSEPH, IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY: I do. I think it's a sound policy. And if it weren't sound and if it didn't make sense, then every major city that has a sanctuary policy like Denver would also change the policy.

O'REILLY: Not everyone. The sanctuary cities are Chicago, New York, Miami, Houston, Denver, L.A., San Francisco. But a lot of the cities, smaller cities don't have this policy.

But what would you say to Detective Young's wife, widow, and two young daughters? I mean, he lost his life because an illegal alien, who shouldn't have been here, who, you know, could have been deported after the Denver police found him with no car insurance three times, what do you say to them?

JOSEPH: Well, first of all, my heart goes out to them. I think it's a tragedy that their family is having to deal with. But I don't think that it's appropriate to blame the police. I don't think it's appropriate to blame the mayor's office or Denver policy.

It's only appropriate to place blame where blame is due. And that is on the individual that committed the crime.

O'REILLY: But the individual who committed the crime should have never been in this country. He was here illegally. Now there's blame to go around there. The federal government won't stop them from coming in. And the local governments, when they confront them, won't turn them over to ICE in Vermont, which is the new Homeland Security INS office.

So I don't know, I'm just -- I'm trying to get inside your mind, counselor. I'm trying to understand why you don't want illegal aliens to be identified and removed from the Mile High City. Why?

O'REILLY: Well, you can't remove them any other way but have the local authorities do it. And the city says don't do it.

JOSEPH: I certainly think that if an individual commits a crime like this, then he or she...

O'REILLY: No, no crime involved. I don't know why you, a very educated and intelligent man, don't want illegal aliens removed from Denver by the local authorities. Why you don't want that to happen?

JOSEPH: Because I have a concern that when a victim of a violent crime, who happens to be undocumented, contacts the police, she will be turned over to immigration. It will discourage victims of crimes from reporting crimes because of fears that they will be turned over to the police.

O'REILLY: ...so you believe that the rights of an undocumented alien, as you put it, may be victimized, supersede the rights of all other Coloradans, who don't want to confront people in here illegally. That's what you're saying?

JOSEPH: I believe that it creates a dangerous precedent if police officers are deputized to be federal agents. First of all...

O'REILLY: But they're not deputized. All police officers in this country, whether they're local, state, or federal, swear to uphold the laws of the country, not just the laws of Colorado or Denver, the laws of the country. And it's clear that people here illegally have violated federal law. Yet you don't want your local police to uphold...

JOSEPH: There are very few provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act that are criminal.

O'REILLY: Because they choose to adjudicate it that way. The law says you can't come into this country without the proper paperwork. It's a federal offense, a criminal offense.

JOSEPH: It is not. It is a federal civil offense. And what you're asking our states and our cities to do is simply beyond their means. I mean, the cities are already -- the police forces are already overtaxed trying to do what they should be doing.

JOSEPH: ...turn over every speeder, everybody who's going 43 miles in a 30 to immigration.

O'REILLY: OK, but we've heard this argument before. You just don't believe that law should be enforced. But I -- we'll tell the audience, we'll clarify it. I do believe it's a violation of criminal law for people to come in here illegally. We'll clarify.

Coming right back with a very provocative report. Did Newsweek magazine cause violent anti-U.S. demonstration inside Afghanistan? That's up next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2005 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 Voxant, Inc., which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, LLC'S and Voxant, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

WASHINGTON - Less than two years ago, an agency of the Homeland Security Department set out on a simple mission — to round up and deport immigrants who committed sex crimes against children. Thursday, the government announced that its effort has reached a milestone, one that demonstrates how serious the problem is.

Since July 2003, agents of ICE — Immigration and Customs Enforcement — have rounded up a surprising 5,000 people, nearly all accused of the sexual exploitation of children.

Some were picked up in the middle of the night, some after police chases. Others were put in handcuffs on the street or where they work.

"It is clear that the need is greater than we ever understood when we launched this program just 20 months ago," says ICE agent Michael Garcia.

Most were immigrants whose sex crimes made them deportable. But some were United States citizens.

One 61-year-old Baltimore man was arrested under new federal sexual tourism laws. He pleaded guilty to traveling to Asia to have sex with young children.

Internet ring foiled
In January 2004, agents also broke up a huge global Internet child pornography ring. The two men from Belarus who ran it pleaded guilty just this week in New Jersey, in a case that led to more than 1,000 arrests of the porn ring's customers.

"These predators come from all walks of life," says Garcia. "We have had people in positions of trust in their communities: Teachers, doctors, school bus drivers, even police officers."

Thursday, members of Congress signaled that they're prepared to give the roundups — called Operation Predator — more support.

‘Tip of the iceberg’
"I think it is the tip of the iceberg, and I think that's the greater tragedy, is that there may be more than we might imagine," says Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas.

But some immigration lawyers, like Jeff Joseph of Denver, say the program reaches too far, by arresting technical violators, like someone who has sex with a barely underage girlfriend.

"Operation Predator makes no distinction between a violent sexual predator and a person who's engaging in consensual sex with his girlfriend," says Joseph. "And that's the problem with the program."

Still, the program has widespread support in Congress. And agents say they have so many investigative leads now, they can't even follow them all.

A new government report says federal immigration agents lack guidelines in choosing which illegal immigrants to deport, often taking sole caregivers or those with medical problems.

Based on humanitarian concerns, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have discretion to choose whether to pursue and deport immigrants with no criminal history. Illegal presence in the United States by itself is a civil violation, not criminal.

When Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raided the Swift & Co. meat plant in Greeley last December they took parents from young children, setting off an outcry from critics.

The Government Accountability Office report released Tuesday underscored those complaints about ICE breaking up families during work site raids and arresting illegal immigrants who were not their intended targets but happen to be present, called "collateral arrests."

ICE officials said Tuesday they had not had the chance to read the 48-page report and would not comment.

"ICE has not taken steps to ensure that written guidance designed to promote the appropriate exercise of discretion during alien apprehension and removal is comprehensive and up to date and has not established time frames for updating guidance," the report concluded.

"For example, field operational manuals have not been updated to provide information about the appropriate exercise of discretion in light of a recent expansion of ICE work site enforcement and fugitive operations, in which officers are more likely to encounter aliens with humanitarian issues or who are not targets of investigations."

A Rocky Mountain News report last year found that ICE officers have the ability to exercise discretion before deporting undocumented immigrants, while prioritizing those who pose a threat to national security or public safety.

Once an illegal immigrant is arrested, the agency has much more limited discretion in whether to drop deportation proceedings.

However, the series, titled the "The Border Within," found that criminals who are in the country illegally were slipping through the deportation net while those whose only crime was being in the country illegally were being swept up in ever increasing numbers.

"(ICE) does need guidelines, especially because we're heading toward a scary situation where we have local law enforcement cooperating with ICE. Whose getting swept up in the net? Women, children, babies. That is not an exercise of discretion," said Kim Baker Medina, a Fort Collins immigration attorney.

Laurel Herndon, a Boulder immigration attorney, said there was a "huge problem" with inconsistencies in the use of discretion.

"In one jurisdiction, you can get tagged for traffic offenses. In another, you're left alone," she said.

But Jeff Joseph, previous chair of the Colorado Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said coming up with guidelines for the use of discretion is tricky.

"How do you come up with guidelines for using discretion?" he asked. "Guidelines and discretion don't necessarily go hand in hand."

"In Denver, we've had extremely positive experiences with ICE using discretion in cases where there was family separation or health issues," he said. "Clearly, that doesn't happen in other places."

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

ICE facility plan gets mixed reviews

Immigrants' rights groups say adding beds isn't solution

Plans to more than triple the size of an immigration detention facility in Aurora have drawn praise from some local residents and criticism from immigrants' rights groups.

Florida-based GEO Group announced it would expand the 400-bed Aurora Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center to 1,500 beds at a cost of $72 million. The facility near East 30th Avenue and Peoria Street is in an industrial area of mostly warehouses.

A representative from GEO and the detention center's warden, Teresa Hunt, met with community members and others Thursday evening to address questions and concerns about the new building.

"I don't have any concerns," said Nadine Caldwell of the Northwest Aurora Neighborhood Association and a former Aurora city councilwoman. "They have been a good neighbor for years and years." Caldwell said the new facility will ease crowding and that plans for a new parking lot will take cars driven by employees and visitors off surrounding streets.

"The expansion of the Aurora ICE Processing Center will play an important role in addressing the need by federal agencies for detention bed space around the country," said GEO Chairman George Zoley in a prepared statement.

GEO expects the 1,100-bed expansion to generate approximately $30 million in yearly revenues.

"The solution is not to create more detention centers by lining the pockets of a huge corporation with a spotty record," said Gabriela Flora of the American Friends Service Committee. "The solution is to fix our broken immigration system."

In July a Government Accountability Office report found that the Aurora facility was crowded and has an unreliable phone system that often prevents detainees from contacting their lawyers. Immigration watchdog groups also have complained about problems accessing internal audits of the facility.

ICE spokesman Carl Rusnok said problems at the Aurora facility were rectified before the GAO report was released. He added that ICE had no connection to the expansion plan and that the current contract with the Aurora facility is for 400 beds. That contract, however, is up for annual review for the next four years.

"ICE didn't ask GEO to expand its facility, so they're banking on the government detaining more people," Flora said.

Jeff Joseph, a Denver immigration attorney and former chairman of the Colorado chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, believes the practice of detaining people for violating immigration law is fundamentally flawed.

"Detention for civil violations is supposed to be the exception, not the norm," said Joseph. "People who overstay their visa should not be thrown together with ax murderers."