Immigration status hinders eligibility for stimulus checks – Live 5 News WCSC

CHARLESTON, S.C. (WCSC) – Millions of people may be cashing in their stimulus checks, but there are some taxpayers who aren’t able to receive relief payments.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security, otherwise known as the CARES act, is the government’s $2.2 trillion economic relief bill passed in March, in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

According to the bill, immigrants who have a social security number are eligible for the stimulus checks. Those who have a green card or certain work visas are able to receive payments, but many non-citizens and undocumented immigrants are not.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) says that American citizens who file taxes with their immigrant spouse, who do not have a Social Security number, are also ineligible. Those taxpayers could choose to file separately from their spouse to receive payments.

Louise Pocock is an immigration policy attorney with the South Carolina Appleseed Legal Justice Center. She says these immigrants are still paying taxes with an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN).

“Not every immigration status which is lawful in the U.S comes with work authorization, so if you’re in a status that doesn’t have work authorization but maybe you’re married to someone who files taxes with work authorization, you could have an ITIN number,” Pocock said.

It’s also a way for undocumented immigrants to pay taxes, who are looking to adjust their legal status.

Community advocates say that the lack of financial help takes a toll on the immigrant community.

“We’re talking about construction workers, hospitality, and cleaning companies. It’s very difficult for those families,” said Lydia Cotton, Hispanic liaison in the immigrant community. “At this point we have hundreds of people who are not paying their rent, and can’t pay their rent.”

The SC Appleseed Legal justice center is pushing for these taxpayers to be included in future stimulus packages at a federal level. In the meantime, local groups are coming together to start a mutual aid fund to help people who aren’t eligible for stimulus checks or unemployment benefits.

“We’re asking people to donate part, or all of their check to the fund and this will go directly to help people in need,” community activist Fernando Soto said.

Copyright 2020 WCSC. All rights reserved.

Powered by WPeMatico

An Immigration Advocate Explains Trump’s 60 Day Immigration Ban – OPB News

In late April, President Donald Trump signed an executive order “temporarily suspending immigration into the United States.” Trump said it was a response to the economic crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic and would ensure unemployed Americans be “first in line for jobs as our economy reopens”.

The president first announced the decision in a late-night tweet that he would “temporarily suspend immigration into the United States!”

The 60-day ban suspends immigration for people seeking green cards, though there are exceptions to the order. 

Sam Reese is an accredited representative for Immigration Counselling Service, a nonprofit immigration law firm in Oregon. Reese spoke with OPB about the details of the executive order and how it could impact immigrants living in Oregon.

 Para información en español sobre quien va a ser afectado por este orden, y como obtener ayuda o recursos, escucha este audio o visita este sitio de web:

Which groups will be affected by this executive order?

“People seeking green cards, and it’s mainly people who would be coming from abroad — so, processing to come into the United States as a legal permanent resident. Those are going to be mainly family members of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents who are trying to reunify with their family. It will also stop some people who are coming through immigrant visas, people who have employers who are petitioning for them, and a small number of people who are coming in on humanitarian visas. …

“If we’re talking about a delay of 60 days, that may delay a lot of people’s applications, but there are certain people who could be permanently ineligible for a visa if the delays go beyond their time period. I do have at least one client right now who, if he turns 21 — he’s 20 now — and if he turns 21 before they give him his visa, he’ll be permanently ineligible.”

Which groups are exempt?

“When the announcement was made, it seemed like it was a blanket announcement for all green cards. But a few days later, when the proclamation was made public, there had been several people who had been exempt, including spouses and children of citizens, and people with essential employment-based petitions — that includes people in health, as well as food production and several other categories.”

How could the Pacific Northwest be impacted?

“The Pacific Northwest has a large portion of people who are working in agriculture, and those people are potentially going to be missing their opportunity to be here for this season. … I know that employers around the Pacific Northwest have expressed concern about the lack of people available to produce agricultural products, in all aspects of growing and distributing them.”

Haven’t many immigration services been halted due to the pandemic anyway?

“This announcement comes over a month after all of the in-person services through USCIS, as well as the consulates around the world, have halted operation. So, the big changes that we’re going to see from this might not seem all that large in the short term — those processes have already stopped. But what’s concerning is the process of scapegoating people, as well as the fact that the administration has chosen certain categories as targets for people who will not be eligible to process.”

Could the executive order continue past the original 60-day ban?

“That’s another concern about making the proclamation tied to unemployment. As the 60 days wraps up, even if the rest of the economy seems to be going well, the administration could very well continue this on, saying the unemployment rate is too high, or using whatever reasoning that they think to continue that. … It was left open deliberately.”

Listen to the full conversation by clicking play on the audio player at the top of this story.

Powered by WPeMatico

Only US immigrants in California will receive a stimulus check – AS English

In March the United States President Donald Trump signed the CARES Act, a $2.2 trillion economic relief bill to aid millions of Americans who lost their jobs because of the coronavirus pandemic. Since mid-April people have been receiving a $1,200 stimulus payment for individuals and $2,400 for married couples that get an additional $500 per child under 17.

Since Donald Trump became president of the U.S. he has implemented strict immigration policies and when he signed this bill it excluded millions of workers who have been in the country before the beginning of the pandemic and that won’t receive any help from the government.

Only immigrants who have a social security number are eligible to get the stimulus payment and those who have a green card or a work visa will receive aid from the government. This leaves millions of undocumented immigrants out of the CARES act.

Many of this undocumented immigrants have been helping the nation by working through the pandemic performing essential services but have no financial safety net. Unauthorized immigrants make up about a quarter of farm workers who have been providing essential work but are not receiving any sort of aid.

Also millions of immigrants who don’t qualify for the CARES’ Act have been paying taxes during their time in the United States because they don’t have a social security number. These exclusions impact entire families, including their US citizen children.

California is offering stimulus payment to undocumented immigrants

The ‘Golden State’ has decided not to turn its back on undocumented immigrants who are vital for the economy of the state and the Gov. Gary Newsom has decided to provide a stimulus payment for them.

On 15 April Newsom announced the creation of a $125 million Disaster Relief Fund to assist undocumented immigrants in California that are suffering economically during the coronavirus pandemic.

Unauthorized workers should receive a one-time payment of $500 per adult to roughly 150,000 immigrants. In a press release, Newsom said, “California is the most diverse state in the nation. Our diversity makes us stronger and more resilient. Every Californian, including our undocumented neighbors and friends, should know that California is here to support them during this crisis. We are all in this together.”

Powered by WPeMatico

Trump Is Using the Coronavirus to Flout Immigration Laws – The New York Times

For more than a month, under the guise of fighting the coronavirus, the Trump administration has used the nation’s public health laws as a pretext for summarily deporting refugees and children at the border.

This new border policy runs roughshod over legal rights, distracts from meaningful measures to prevent spread of the coronavirus and undermines confidence in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the nation’s top health protection agency, which delivered the directive that imposes these deportations.

The administration has weaponized an arcane provision of a quarantine law first enacted in 1893 and revised in 1944 to order the blanket deportation of asylum-seekers and unaccompanied minors at the Mexican border without any testing or finding of disease or contagion. Legal rights to hearings, appeals, asylum screening and the child-specific procedures are all ignored.

More than 20,000 people have been deported under the order, including at least 400 children in just the first few weeks, according to the administration and news reports. Though the order was justified as a short-term emergency measure, the indiscriminate deportations continue unchecked and the authorization has been extended and is subject to continued renewal.

The deportation policy was issued by the C.D.C. based on an unprecedented interpretation of the public health laws. The policy bears the unmistakable markings of a White House strategy imposed on the C.D.C. and designed to circumvent prior court rulings to achieve the administration’s political goals.

The Border Patrol is carrying out the C.D.C. directive by “expulsion” of anyone who arrives at U.S. land borders without valid documents or crosses the border illegally, not because they are contagious or sick but because they come from Mexico or Canada, regardless of their country of origin. The deportations violate the legal right to apply for asylum and ignore the special procedures for unaccompanied children.

Our immigration laws guarantee that any noncitizen “irrespective” of status, no matter how they arrive, is entitled to an asylum process. U.S. law has adopted the international obligation that refugees cannot be returned “in any manner whatsoever” to a place where they risk persecution. The courts have protected these rights again and again. When the administration tried to impose an asylum ban more than a year ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit blocked it, calling it an “end-run” around Congress, a decision the Supreme Court refused to overturn.

Now, with the C.D.C. directive, the administration is imposing an even more sweeping prohibition on asylum by exploiting pandemic fears, and U.S. Border and Customs Protection is labeling the policy a public health “expulsion” instead of an immigration deportation.

Despite what the administration says, the order is not part of any coherent plan to stop border travel or prevent introduction or spread of contagious people or the virus, which is already widespread in the United States. Nothing limits travel from Mexico or Canada by truck drivers, those traveling for commercial or educational purposes, and many others, including green card holders and U.S. citizens. And the restrictions that exist do not apply at all to travel if it’s by airplane.

The administration’s order is like a bull’s-eye drawn on the side of a barn around an arrow that’s already been shot. The targets are refugees and unaccompanied children, and the policy is designed to thwart their rights.

The order claims a public health purpose by saying it’s addressing the danger of crowded conditions at Border Patrol stations, noting that these stations are not equipped to quarantine people who may be infected with Covid-19, or to treat them medically. That’s a problem of the Border Patrol’s own creation and can be solved by changing procedures and detention practices. This medically gerrymandered definition of dangerous crowding is meant to deport those who are entitled to protection, while leaving others who pose an equal or greater risk untouched.

If the concern were truly congregate locations, the administration would address the dangerous conditions at immigration jails and prisons. If supermarkets can space out shoppers, the Border Patrol can adopt emergency processing measures to ensure sufficient distancing.

The law that the administration invokes allows the government to suspend through quarantine the introduction of goods and persons into the U.S. — not to issue deportation orders. Importantly, when that law was first enacted, Congress rejected calls for targeting immigrants. It recognized that any traveler — regardless of citizenship — could arrive here carrying a communicable disease and that any law addressing that concern should apply equally to all.

And critically, since that law was updated more than 75 years ago, Congress has enacted landmark refugee and child protection laws that the administration is now trying to evade.

The United States and the rest of the world face a pandemic of unknown scope and duration that has led to the greatest social and economic disruption in recent history. But the dangers we face are not limited to the pandemic alone. The risk is also that governments will abuse the emergency to abandon the rule of law and adopt discriminatory measures targeting those they disfavor.

Protecting public health and ensuring fair procedures for refugees and children are both essential. They are not in conflict and can be served side by side. Proper screening for both is possible. Neither needs to be sacrificed for the other.

The administration’s order expelling refugees and children tarnishes the C.D.C., does nothing to protect public health, targets the most vulnerable, tramples their rights and cloaks the deportations as fighting the coronavirus in order to escape accountability. “Flattening the curve” should not be an excuse for dismantling the law.

Lucas Guttentag, a professor at Stanford Law School and a senior scholar at Yale Law School, served as senior counselor in the Department of Homeland Security during the Obama administration. Stefano M. Bertozzi, a physician and health economist, is professor of health policy and management and dean emeritus at the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected].

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Powered by WPeMatico

Los asilos de Nuevo León son puestos en cuarentena tras brote de COVID-19 – Expansión Política

Te puede interesar

Asimismo, de los 47 adultos mayores, 42 fueron trasladados al hospital comunitario habilitado en el Teatro Nova por la empresa Ternium para atender casos de coronavirus; cabe destacar que 5 de los contagiados fueron reportados por la Secretaría de Salud estatal como personas “en estado crítico (…) Lo que significa que traen ya un problema pulmonar, tienen neumonía, y es un grupo muy vulnerable”.

De la O alertó que, de los adultos mayores contagiados en el asilo, “solamente por la edad tienen una probabilidad del 25 por ciento más de fallecer, aparte, el 40 por ciento son diabéticos y el 45 por ciento son hipertensos. En otros países que se han presentado brotes en asilos, la gran mayoría de los pacientes fallece, es por eso la preocupación de nosotros de tomar el control del asilo y lo tomamos desde el primer día del brote”.

El funcionario estatal explicó que el virus llegó al asilo por medio de una empleada del lugar, por lo que el estado optó por poner en cuarentena a todas las casas de retiro en Nuevo León.

Y en el caso del asilo “Luis Elizondo”, las instalaciones fueron cerradas, y el resto de los adultos mayores están en observación. Incluso quedaron suspendidas las visitas de familiares.

Te puede interesar

“En los otros asilos que se encuentran en Nuevo León, ya he girado la instrucción, para que se realice una supervisión súper intensa y que el personal que los atienda se quede a vivir ahí, no puede estar yendo a su casa y regresando”, comentó.

“Porque pueden adquirir el virus, no tener síntomas y contagiar al grupo de personas más vulnerables; si es necesario pagarles dos o tres veces más lo que sea necesario, pero que se queden ahí, y que sea por periodos de 14 días y a los 14 días descansan, y llegan otros y así sucesivamente”.

Cifras oficiales de la Secretaría de Salud estatal refieren que en Nuevo León existen 102 establecimientos, entre públicos y privados, y en total cuentan con 3 mil 080 adultos mayores, y laboran mil 600 personas.

Sin embargo, el secretario de Salud estatal aseguró que se investigará la existencia de asilos “clandestinos” ya que hay denuncias ciudadanas sobre este tipo de instalaciones.

Powered by WPeMatico