On Thursday May 6, 2010, Ken Schmitt and immigration attorney colleague Suzanne Brown, debated immigration reform topics with conservative talk radio host Mark Reardon of St. Louis'  very own "voice of St. Louis" KMOX 1120 AM.  The topics discussed ranged from the many failures of US immigration law, the difficulties inherent in boarder enforcement and the need to overhaul the immigration system in the United States so that it better reflects the demand for lawful immigration into the United States.  To listen to the entire interview, use the play button below.

Colombian television programs TeleAntioquia Noticias and TeleAntioquia Global aired an hour-long news program called "Migracion y Fronteras." The program provides a thorough review of the history of immigration in the United States, recent changes in policies and procedures, and an up-to-date review of the immigration debate. This policy review takes into consideration the increase in migrant deaths as a result of US border policy changes in the early 1990s, and the development of the border region on both sides of the wall, including perspectives of humanitarian groups and issues related to human smuggling as well. In it, the program interviews Gustavo Arango, among others, who offers his expert opinions on immigration in addition to his own personal experiences immigrating to the US. Gustavo's interview is included in Part 3 below.

TeleMedellin, a television program based in Medellin, Colombia, featured Gustavo Arango of US Legal Solutions in this segment titled "Inmigracion: Especiales de Noticias TeleMedellin." This program introduces the Arizona Senate Bill 1070, and provides an overview of the immigration situation in the United States, with perspectives from immigrants caught in the middle of this increasingly polarized immigration debate.


Please note: the first 6 minutes of Part 1 were provided to this office in poor quality and may not play smoothly. After the 6-minute mark, the remainder of Part 1 and all of Part 2 should play without issue.

Recently, Ken Schmitt of US Legal Solutions was a guest on the popular morning "drive time" radio show of Magraw Milhaven on KTRS "big 550" AM station.  Ken discussed a few of the many failings of current US immigration law, the problems with Arizona SB 1070 and other immigration related issues.  To hear the full interview from July 22, 2010, see please use the play feature below.

Gustavo Arango is featured in this Colombian talk show program called "De tu a tu". This interview, conducted by  Henry Horacio, begins by providing a brief background and career history of Gustavo, and then details his role as an immigration lawyer in St. Louis. Gustavo offers his perspective on immigration in the United States, both in his personal experience as a Colombian immigrant to the United States as well as in his professional experiences as an immigration attorney. The interview, available below in two parts, helps to deepen our understanding of immigration in the United States, and offers new perspectives on both the challenges and benefits of immigration as a global phenomenon.

Gustavo Arango and Ken Schmitt of US Legal Solutions LLC appeared on the Colombian news program "Teleantioquia Global" where they spoke about the Arizona legislation known as Senate Bill 1070. Other office staff, including Sara Bollinger and Ellen Weber, also appear in the video, which introduces our firm in addition to our firm's position against Arizona SB1070 and other anti-immigrant legislation. See parts one and two below.

In response to an editorial written by Tad Armstrong of Edwardsville, Illinois, published by the St. Louis Post Dispatch on June 2, 2010, Attorney Ken Schmitt of US Legal Solutions penned an article published by the Post on June 9, 2010, titled, "Anarchy is legalized racial profiling." Both articles, with reader comments, can be viewed through the St. Louis Post Dispatch website, at www.stltoday.com.

Ken's article, which demonstrates how laws like the Arizona Senate Bill 1070 legalize racial profiling, is below. Both Ken's and Tad's articles can be downloaded here.

On April 28, 2010, Attorney Ken Schmitt of US Legal Solutions along with other leaders and community activists from the greater St. Louis region appeared in Jefferson City, MO before the House Committee on International Trade and Immigration of the Missouri Congress, to offer testimony in opposition to House Bill 2449. The Bill, which was introduced by Representative Mark Parkinson (R, 16), and co-sponsored by Representative Tim Jones (R, 89) and others (Grisamore, Gatschenberger, Nolte, Bivins, Koenig, Nieves, Munzlinger), proposes to repeal sections 566.200, 566.206 and 577,675 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri and enact three new sections “relating to illegal immigration, with penalty provisions.” In effect, the Bill has several flaws that Ken explained in his testimony, which you can read below.

The 2010 Legislative Session ended without a decision made with regards to HB 2449. For a copy of the proposed bill, please click here.

STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO HB 2449

My name is Ken Schmitt.  I am licensed to practice law in the States of Missouri and Illinois and practice in the state and federal courts throughout Eastern Missouri and Southern Illinois.  Approximately half of the work in our office is immigration-related, and our client base is approximately sixty percent Latino. As an immigration attorney, I am a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (“AILA”) and the Immigration Section of the Missouri Bar Association.  I am currently a member of the Executive Board and, on July 1, 2010 will become the Chair Elect of the Missouri/Kansas Chapter of AILA.  Additionally, I have served as the President for the last two years of the Advisory Board of Catholic Charities Community Services—Southside (“Southside”).  Southside is a direct social services program of Catholic Charities, St. Louis, which provides desperately needed family counseling and other culturally competent social services to the Latino and Vietnamese immigrant communities in the St. Louis Metropolitan region.

As a member of the Missouri Bar, an immigration attorney, and a life long Missourian, I am greatly disturbed by the House Bill 2449 and strongly urge that this committee and the Missouri Legislature reject it. I would like to give you five concrete reasons why you should reject HB 2449.

HB 2449 adds nothing to the protections of actual victims of human trafficking.  There already exists extensive federal legislation pertaining to human trafficking and extensive federal and private agency resources are spent on the Missouri Human Trafficking Task Force made up of representatives of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Attorneys Office, and non-governmental federal grantees identified by the federal government as participating organizations.  While existing Missouri law is effective in complementing this federal effort, the proposed changes in Missouri law set out in HB 2449 would undermine current Federal efforts. 

HB 2449 attacks the victim of trafficking and does nothing to strengthen the law against traffickers.  In order for the existing federal and Missouri efforts to combat the crime of trafficking, it is critical that the legal framework protect and encourage trafficking victims to come forward.  In order for this to happen, these victims must be free to seek the services and protection of federal, state and non-governmental community partners as well as the legal community.  Federal, state and non-governmental community partners and the legal community must be equally free to lend their protection and services to these victims.  HB 2449 would devastate the existing network of governmental, legal and non-governmental organizations.

HB 2449 would potentially criminalize the efforts and perfectly legal work of non-governmental community organizations as well as members of the Missouri Bar who provide lawful services to the victims of human trafficking.  This would destroy the very purpose of Missouri’s existing human trafficking statutes.  It would further criminalize the provision of legal services to persons who are expressly entitled to such services under federal and even Missouri law.  The mere provision by an attorney of transportation to the very immigration court appointment to which the undocumented person is commanded by Federal law to appear would run afoul of Section 577.675 (2) R.S.Mo if HB 2449 were passed.  This Section 577.675 (2) R.S.Mo, if HB 2449 were passed would provide:

It shall be unlawful for any person to conceal, harbor, or shelter from detection any illegal alien in any place within the state of Missouri including any building or means of transportation, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that the illegal alien has come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law.  It shall be unlawful for any illegal alien to transport himself or herself within the state of Missouri.

Individuals in removal or deportation proceedings before the Federal Immigration Court are absolutely required by federal law to appear before that court (whether currently in St. Louis or in Kansas City, Missouri) whether or not they are in fact removable or deportable. HB 2449 would make it illegal for their attorney or anyone else to drive them to court.  It would make it equally illegal for the individual in removal or deportation proceedings to “transport” themselves to court.  Additionally, persons in removal proceedings are often required to travel and report to ICE on a monthly basis while proceedings are in progress. Presumably one mark of sound law would be that a “good law” encourages individuals in court proceedings to appear for their court dates and other legal obligations.  Obviously, HB 2449 fails this test.

HB 2449, by criminalizing the purported transportation or sheltering of an undocumented person for any reason whatsoever further places the individual service provider (of transportation services, ie: Metro and other public and private transportation companies, medical services, hospitals, social welfare and benefit providers and other programs) in the position of having to be an expert qualified to determine the lawful status of each and every recipient to whom it provides services.  Alternatively, these innocent providers run the serious risk of being accused of “reckless disregard” and therefore a felon.  It further places the innocent provider in the position of having to become an immigration enforcement deputy in the course of providing services.  This can only result in entrenched racial profiling as a matter of Missouri public policy. It will further destroy the credibility and trust held by service providers across all immigrant communities, (regardless of status), and destroy their ability to render effective services.

I have provided five concrete, practical, and legal reasons that HB 2449 should be rejected: One, HB 2449 adds nothing to the protections of victims of human trafficking. Two, HB 2449 does nothing to strengthen the law against traffickers. Three, HB 2449 criminalizes the efforts and perfectly legal work of non-governmental community organizations and attorneys that provide lawful services to victims of human trafficking. Four, through the provisions regarding transportation, HB 2449 undermines federal law by discouraging and punishing persons who seek to abide by the law. Five, HB 2449 places service provides in a role of immigration enforcement deputies, which role they are completely unqualified to fulfill, and entrenches racial profiling as a matter of Missouri public policy. 

In conclusion, because of the overwhelmingly negative consequences of this bill; because it provides no benefit whatsoever to trafficking victims or the residents of Missouri; because, quite simply the great state of Missouri is, indeed, better than this, I strongly urge this committee and the Missouri Legislature to reject House Bill 2449.

Previously, on February 16, 2010, we reported that State Representative Cynthia Davis had introduced HB 1231 which proposed to eliminate the administration of the Missouri Drivers License Exam in any language except English and further, proposed to prohibit either the Department of Revenue or any applicant providing a translator for the purpose of assisting with the written Drivers License Exam.  

Since then, three other similar bills have been introduced by Representative Gatschenberger (HB 2139, 2140 and 2143).  HB 2139 and HB 2140 propose similar restrictions as Davis' HB 1231.  HB 2143 goes so far as to suggest that only United States Citizens should be permitted to apply for a Missouri Drivers License.  HB 2143 goes so far as to arbitrarily excluding tens of thousands of lawful permanent (with green cards) and non-permanent (with other non-permanent legal status) immigrants  from the privilege of driving.

The depth of stupidity to which the discussion in Missouri has sunk of anything "immigrant related" is clearly demonstrated by these proposals. Common sense has long since left the building in the Missouri capital!

Thankfully, the St. Louis Post Dispatch has raised its voice on this issue in its recent editorial, "License restrictions try to solve non-existent problem" (click to view editorial and comments).

To view more information or to read each of these bills, click the below links:
HB 1231 , HB 2139 , HB 2140 , HB 2143

For information on Representative Cynthia Davis or Chuck Gatschenberger, click the below links:
Chuck Gatschenberger
Cynthia Davis

To translate this blog or any other part of our website to Espanol or most other languages, use Google Translate.

I am the first to admit that, while raised Roman Catholic and educated almost exclusively by the Archdiocese (grade school and high school) and the Jesuits (undergraduate, graduate and law school), I do not always share each and every policy point of view of the Catholic Church.  However, there are times when I find a deep and profound connection to my Catholic heritage such as when I read Archbishop Carlson's most recent letter in the St. Louis Review entitled:  Before the Cross; We are an immigrant Church called to welcome strangers.  I am often asked why we do what we do, seemingly always at odds with the Federal, State and local governments, always the "David" fighting the "Goliath" and often times with less than spectacular remuneration.  I cannot give a better answer than Archbishop Carlson when he writes (referring back to the 2000 US Catholic Conference of Bishops' pastoral letter entitled Welcoming the Stranger Among Us: Unity in Diversity):

Looking back on the history of Catholicism in our country, we calledattention to the waves of immigration that shaped the character of ournation and of our local churches, including the Archdiocese of St.Louis. We also observed that the immigrant experience, which is deeplyrooted in our country's religious, social and political history, ischanging. Whereas previous immigrants came to the United States,"predominately from Europe or as slaves from Africa, the new immigrantscome from Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacificislands, the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe and the former SovietUnion and Yugoslavia"

*     *     *     *

As a Catholic community, we vigorously support our nation's right andresponsibility to provide secure boundaries for the protection of ourpeople and to guard against those who would do us harm. At the sametime, we reject all positions or policies that are anti-immigrant,nativist, ethnocentric or racist. Such narrow and destructive views areprofoundly anti-American. They oppose the principles of human dignityand freedom that are the foundation for our American way of life -- away that has historically been extended to all who have come to ourshores seeking life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in a just andprosperous society. These divisive and exclusionary attitudes are alsoprofoundly anti-Catholic. They deny the dignity of human persons whoare made in God's image, and they contradict the essential unity andcatholicity to which we are called as members of the one family of God.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you Archbishop Carlson for speaking clearly and forcefully on this most  "American" and  "Catholic" issue.

To read Archbishop Carlson's letter in its entirety  click here.  

To translate this blog or any other part of our website to Espanol or most other languages, use Google Translate.

In an apparent race to the bottom of the insanity barrel, State Representative Cynthia Davis has recently introduced before the Missouri House of Representatives HB 1231 which would require that all Missouri Driver's License written examinations be administered exclusively in the English language.  The bill would further prohibit translators from either being provided or brought at the applicant's own expense.

According to the bill's language, the purpose of the additional restrictions purports to be to assure that the applicant can understand all highway markings and safety warnings and be able to safely operate a motor vehicle.  However, anyone who has ever driven a car in a foreign country knows that fluency, sufficient to be able to take and pass a written exam in English, has nothing to do with whether a person can understand the meaning of basic road signs or simple safety phrases in English.  Moreover, the Missouri Driver's License exam includes a sign/warning recognition component in which the non-English fluent applicant can easily explain the meaning of the tested signs or warnings, respond in his or her native language which explanation can be translated by an interpreter.  However, HB 1231, if passed, would eliminate this simple process. 

The result, if HB 1231 becomes law, would be to deny licenses to many new, lawful Missouri immigrants and many other Missouri residents who are not fully literate in the English language but who otherwise depend on the ability to drive to work, take their children to school, access medical care or meet any other of an endless list of basic needs.  In the balance, HB 1231 would do absolutely nothing to enhance the safety of our public roadways nor provide any other benefit whatsoever.

Unfortunately, HB 1231 has been (ironically) assigned to the Missouri House Committee on  "International Trade and Immigration". It has had its first full hearing on February 10, 2010.  No Committee vote on the Bill has been announced as of the time of this entry.

You can view the complete text of HB 1231 by clicking here.   You can track the progress of HB 1231 in the Missouri Legislature by clicking here.  You can view the remarks in opposition to HB 1231 submitted by Ken Schmitt of US Legal Solutions, LLC by clicking here.

US Legal Solutions strongly urges all Missouri voters to contact their own state representatives and state senators as well as each member of the Missouri House International Trade and Immigration Committee to voice their opposition to HB 1231.  You can identify your state representative by clicking here or your state senator by clicking here. The email addresses for each of the International Trade and Immigration House Committee members are: 

************MANY THANKS TO JACOB PRADO GONZALEZ, CONSUL GENERAL DE MEXICO IN KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI FOR SHARING THIS INFORMATION:

Many Happy Returns: Remittances and Their Impact

Money Sent Home by Migrant Workers Helps American Economy Too

Millions of immigrants in the U.S. send billions of dollars in remittances to friends and family members in their home countries each year.  While it is easy to assume that this represents a huge loss for the U.S. economy, the relationship between remittances and the U.S. economy is much more complex than meets the eye. It’s true that remittances are an important source of income for immigrant-sending countries, but remittances are also a huge boost to U.S. exports and the U.S. economy. The following IPC Special Report reveals the economic benefits of remittances to both developing nations and the U.S. economy.

To View this IPC Special Report, click here.

*********RECENTLY UPDATED BLOG ENTRY**********

For Immediate Release

 New Study Confirms Positive Impact of Immigration on Wages of Native-Born Workers
Blaming Immigrants for Native-Born Labor Declines Doesn't Add Up

 

February 5, 2010 

 

Washington D.C.- The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) yesterday released a new study, Immigration and Wages, which confirms what many other economists have found: "that immigration has a small but positive impact on the wages of native-born workers overall."

 

This report comes on the heels of other economic reports, from across the ideological spectrum,that explain how comprehensive immigration reform will lift the wages of U.S.workers, increase tax revenue and boost consumer purchasing power.

 

The EPI report affirms that foreign-born and native-born workers "complement" each other in the labor market through the differing skills and abilities they bring with them to the workplace. When one fully accounts for the many differences between foreign-born and native-born workers in terms of education, occupational experience, and English-language ability, it becomes clear that they cannot simply be swapped for one another like batteries. In fact, the presence of specialized immigrant workers in the labor force tends to increase the productivity, and therefore the wages, of their native-born counterparts.

 

The report makes clear, the plight of low-wage native-born workers can not be blamed on immigrants as some groups have attempted to do: "Declining job quality for the least-educated American workers is due to a host of factors aside from immigration, including declining unionization rates, the eroding real value of the minimum wage, and trade practices that expose U.S. workers with low levels of education to competition from much lower wage workers around the globe." In short,scapegoating immigrants for the nation's economic woes will do nothing to help American workers. 

To obtain and review a copy of this study, click here.

Use Google Translator to view this blog entry and the rest of US Legal Solutions, LLC's website in Espanol or any other language.

*********************************************************
On June 10, 2009, Focus St. Louis (www.focus-stl.org) hosted a Community Policy Forum, where guests Rob Paral and Richard Longworth formed a panel moderated by former Missouri Governor Bob Holden.

Richard Longworth is the author of the book, "Caught in the Middle: America's Heartland in the Age of Globalism", and is a senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

Rob Paral is the author of the inaugural essay for the Chicago Council on Global Affairs' Heartland Paper series. His article, "Mexican Immigration in the Midwest: Meaning and Implications", was published in 2009, and considers the Midwest as a region when evaluating the impact of Mexican immigration.

Prior to the presentation, the Staff of US Legal Solutions was privileged to be invited as part of a select group to meet with Rob Paral and discuss, more in depth, his findings and ideas.  The office was invited because of its close involvement in the St. Louis Latino Community and because of the unique opportunity to share its experiences with Mr. Paral.

Take a look at Rob Paral's essay, available here.
Use Google Translator to view this blog entry and the rest of US Legal Solutions, LLC's website in Espanol or any other language.




El dia 10 de Junio del 2009, la organizacion Focus St. Louis (www.focus-stl.org) organizo un Foro Comunitario sobre la Politica, donde los invitados Rob Paral y Richard Longworth formaron una mesa discursiva, bajo la moderacion del gobernador anterior de Missouri Bob Holden.

Richard Longworth es autor del libro "Caught in the Middle: America's Heartland in the Age of Globalism", y es miembro principal de la organizacion Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

Rob Paral es autor del articulo que empezo la serie Heartland Paper de la Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Su articulo, titulado "Mexican Immigration in the Midwest: Meaning and Implications" fue publicado en el 2009, y considera la Midwest como region en su evaluacion del impacto de la inmigracion mexicana.

Su articulo de Rob Paral esta disponible aqui.

On February 4, 2010, at the invitation of Universidad CES de Medellin, Ken Schmitt provided an academic presentation to the University's Law School and Faculty entitled:

The Constitutional Divide between State and Federal Jurisdiction:
Navigating Jurisdictional Boundaries Inherent in United States Jurisprudence.

Ken's presentation gave an overview of the history and debates leading to the ratification of the United States Constitution as well as some of the key developments in United States Supreme Court decisions which have formed the basis for the role of State and Federal governments and the division of powers between the two.  The program was well attended by both students and professors throughout the school.

To see presentation materials, click here.  To see more about Universidad CES de Medellin, click here.  Use Google Translator to view Universidad CES de Medellin's website in English or to view this blog entry and the rest of US Legal Solutions, LLC's website in Espanol.

On December 4, 2009, Ken Schmitt, principal attorney at US Legal Solutions, was hosted by the St. Louis County Bar Association and spent two hours with St. Louis Area attorneys and judges discussing the implications of various State and Federal criminal charges on the immigration status of non-US citizens.  Ken was joined by Shawn Goulet, experienced criminal defense attorney in Clayton, Missouri and former director of the St. Louis County Public Defenders Office. 

Often times what may normally be a great plea bargain or outcome in a criminal case for a US Citizen can be a disaster for a non-US citizen's immigration status.  Seemingly minor criminal offenses and even Suspended Imposition of Sentence dispositions (generally considered not to be a conviction for state law purposes) can have disastrous consequences for the non-US citizen and result in the immigrant/defendant being deported from the United States or losing any chance of relief in Immigration Court. 

Ken and Shawn spent this time sharing their considerable experience in these matters and discussing the way aggravated felonies, drug offenses, crimes involving moral turpitude, domestic violence and other crimes can effect or ruin a non-US Citizen's immigration status if not handled creatively. They provided a basic outline of how to first assess the immigration status of the non-US citizen client facing criminal charges and then formulate a strategy to preserve their client's immigration options.  They shared their thoughts and experiences in developing various strategies under different circumstances and the intricacies in negotiating these charges with local prosecutors on behalf of immigrants. 

To download a copy of the materials offered at the presentation, click here.  To learn more about Ken's experience and qualifications, click here.

On November 4, 2009, Ken Schmitt, principal attorney at US Legal Solutions, was hosted by the St. Louis County Bar Association and spent two hours with St. Louis Area attorneys and judges discussing the implications of various State and Federal criminal charges on the immigration status of non-US citizens.  Ken was joined by Shawn Goulet, experienced criminal defense attorney in Clayton, Missouri and former director of the St. Louis County Public Defenders Office. 

Often times what may normally be a great plea bargain or outcome in a criminal case for a US Citizen can be a disaster for a non-US citizen's immigration status.  Seemingly minor criminal offenses and even Suspended Imposition of Sentence dispositions (generally considered not to be a conviction for state law purposes) can have disastrous consequences for the non-US citizen and result in the immigrant/defendant being deported from the United States or losing any chance of relief in Immigration Court. 

Ken and Shawn spent this time sharing their considerable experience in these matters and discussing the way aggravated felonies, drug offenses, crimes involving moral turpitude, domestic violence and other crimes can effect or ruin a non-US Citizen's immigration status if not handled creatively. They provided a basic outline of how to first assess the immigration status of the non-US citizen client facing criminal charges and then formulate a strategy to preserve their client's immigration options.  They shared their thoughts and experiences in developing various strategies under different circumstances and the intricacies in negotiating these charges with local prosecutors on behalf of immigrants. 

To download a copy of the materials offered at the presentation, click here.  To learn more about Ken's experience and qualifications, click here.

           Early in 2009, Ken Schmitt of US Legal Solutions joined advocates and community leaders (“St. Ann Group”) to initiate a dialogue with members of the City of St. Ann municipal government and police department regarding the treatment of immigrants in that area. The City of St. Ann is located in North St. Louis County, in the 63074 zip code. In recent years, as the population of immigrants in the United States, as well as in St. Louis, has increased, certain areas of the Greater St. Louis Region have seen a noticeable increase in foreign born populations residing in those areas. St. Ann is one of these “hot spots” for new immigrant residents. While there are countless positive effects of this changing demographic, the negative impacts on immigrants residing in or passing through the municipality are astounding.

 

The need for this dialogue was brought to a head when the City of  St. Ann introduced two proposed ordinances for consideration, both of which were extremely hostile to the peaceful residence of immigrants living in the city limits.  While the various advocacy groups and community leaders worked hard to vocalize generalized complaints related to perceived bias of the city’s police and housing code enforcement, US Legal Solutions was able to provide real, concrete examples of discriminatory practices perpetrated against the immigrant community and, specifically, as to various clients of US Legal Solutions through the years.  These examples mostly pertained to the treatment at traffic stops, arrests and excessive bonds set for those arrested. These examples proved instrumental in moving the city officials towards a meaningful discussion.

 

           The St. Ann Group met with St. Ann officials and discussed several issues of concern. At US Legal Solutions, we received many phone calls from family members who explain that their loved one was pulled over for a routine traffic violation (ie:  no license, no insurance and/or failure to signal a turn) and arrested and assigned a bond of between $1000 and $1500. When either this office or a family member contactedt he jail to inquire about charges and bond, the response for people of Hispanic origin was that they were being held on an “immigration detainer”, meaning that St. Ann officials called Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to inform them that they have a suspected undocumented immigrant in custody and, in most circumstances, permitted ICE to question (in person or by telephone) the immigrant without informing the immigrant to whom they were talking or that they had the right not to speak to the ICE official at all. Often times, this results in ICE issuing and administrative order to the police department to hold the immigrant of ICE after the city charges were disposed.  Often times, information confirming the existence or non-existence of such a Detainer Order was concealed from the attorney representing the immigrant even though the Order was the very authority to hold the immigrant.  Despite federal regulations that establish a 48-hour limit on a Detainer hold for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, St. Ann had, at times, held detainees over 48-hours and sometimes without actually having, in hand, the physical document authorizing the hold.  Generally, these immigrants were also held without any visitation rights with family members, and in some cases, with attorneys and clergy.

 

The “St. Ann Group” initiated conversation on the following general issues:

• Hold Policy for Undocumented Persons
• Bonds
• Jail Visitation: for attorneys, clergy, and family members
• Law Enforcement Training
• Grievance Procedures
• Racial Profiling, Generally

The Group continues to engage St. Ann in dialogue regarding these concerns, and while St. Ann has made some efforts to improve their treatment of immigrants, the Group continues insisting that all these matters be addressed.

 

           US Legal Solutions continues to be an active member of the St. Ann Group and would like to specifically thank John Ammann with the St. Louis University School of Law Legal Clinic, Mari Kenyon with Catholic Legal Assistance Ministry, the Hispanic Ministry and Pastors of Holy Trinity Catholic Parish,the Anti-Defamation League of Missouri, ACLU of Eastern Missouri, Missouri Immigrant and Refugee Advocates (“MIRA”), Metropolitan Congregations United(“MCU”) and others for all their support and work in pushing these issues forward. We will continue advocating for immigrant rights throughout St. Louis, and especially in St. Ann.

Today, it seems almost commonplace to read articles or see news stories or even talk to friends and family about their homes and home loans. With the big news about Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and the subsequent related cases throughout the country, homebuyers and homeowners have faced substantial challenges in the past few months. Before the explosion of such problems nationwide, several St. Louis families came to know firsthand a similar type of fraud and scam.

In 2006, US Legal Solutions filed suit against multiple defendants, on behalf of more than 15 plaintiffs. The matter is a civil suit in the St. Louis City Circuit Court, and the plaintiffs are all alleged to be victims of a scheme, masterminded by Defendant AJ Adewunmi with the collaboration of several others who also named as defendants in the case. In short, the scheme amounted to the fraudulent inducement to contract for the purchase of homes in the City of St. Louis, which also represents a certain pattern of behavior that constitutes an unlawful merchandising practice.

Brief Overview:
In their suit, plaintiffs all allege that AJ Adewunmi was a real estate investor who also masqueraded as a real estate agent (licensed as a salesperson) pretending to assist first time home buyers in the purchase of a home. The plaintiffs were each victims of the scheme, and were either Hispanic or related to an Hispanic during the purchase of their home. Each plaintiff had no experience in purchasing real estate, and more than half of the plaintiffs did not speak nor read English at the time the events occurred. While AJ Adwunmi pretended to be interested in helping newly arrived immigrants realize the American Dream, he was clearly motivated by the prospect of purchasing low value homes and flipping them in a matter of weeks, and then selling them for inflated prices, resulting in profit margins upwards of one hundred percent.

In order to accomplish this, it is believed that AJ Adewunmi identified a vulnerable target community: the Hispanic immigrant community in St. Louis, a group of individuals who he knew were ill-equipped to understand the process, who would come to be wholly trusting and dependent upon AJ and his assistants, and whom he could use as pawns to obtain financing they were completely unqualified to receive to purchase homes that no experienced home buyer would buy under terms no informed person would accept. AJ Adewunmi hired two Hispanic assistants, which he used to recruit buyers in this community and aid AJ in leading the victims down his path of ultimate financial devastation.

Plaintiff's Petition sets out that AJ's scheme has many parts: recruiting the plaintiffs as buyer/clients of his real estate practice; concealing his interest in the homes showed to plaintiffs by keeping them titled in the name of the company (defendant Cots Investments, Inc.), which was wholly owned by AJ Adewunmi and his brother, and failing to make any disclosure of this fact or, if any disclosure at all, it was made not until closing and in English only; showing plaintiffs only homes that were owned by his company Cots, and steering them away from homes not owned by Cots; usurping the loan application process by shopping for loan agents who would submit a loan application based on information supplied entirely by AJ Adewunmi and his assistants, without contact with the plaintiffs/buyers; manufacturing and submitting fraudulent information to support the loan application, such as false employment information, false W-2s, false paystubs; failing to advise plaintiffs of their rights as buyers in the real estate transaction process, advising them to sign contracts for purchase of these homes without sales prices or other material terms filled in, ignoring the budgetary limits voiced by plaintiffs and forging plaintiffs' signatures on contract, loan and closing documents; usurping the role of the title company closing agent and conducting a closing himself or through his assistants, such that the plaintiffs were prevented from having contact with a title company employee and failing to explain documents signed at closing; misleading plaintiffs as to various improvements that were promised to be made in the house purchased or defects to be fixed, including at times concealing the existence of known defects.

As a clear, proximate and direct result of this scheme, the plaintiffs allege that they were unwittingly induced to enter into sales agreements, with AJ Adewunmi's own company being the seller, to purchase houses that were out of their affordable price range and which had a range of structural and/or cosmetic defects, and in many cases were over priced for the value received. Additionally, because of this scheme, each plaintiff was induced to enter into a 30-year contractual obligation to make payments they could not afford and which exceeded the amount that they had told AJ Adewunmi and his assistants they could afford or wanted to pay.

Several plaintiffs have now lost their homes to foreclosure and a few others teeter on the verge of losing their homes, suffering the inevitable financial ruin that comes with foreclosure. Equally certain, as a result of this scheme, AJ Adewunmi profited enormously.

Current Status:
The matter is currently pending in the St. Louis City Circuit Court. We hope to go to trial by the end of the year.

In the News:
An article published in the Riverfront Times, written by Chad Garrison, titled "Mi casa? Sue casa!", presents an overview of the lawsuit that was filed in 2006. It can be viewed online from the RFT website, which you can see here, or for a .pdf file of the same, you can click here.

Rebecca Rivas, a writer for the Arch City Chronicle, also wrote an article about the case. Her article, titled "Quarrels Within Hispanic Community Allow Crime to Flouirsh" is available online here, and a .pdf file of the same is availble here.

For the fourth consecutive year, US Legal Solutions was a prominent participant in the annual Greater St. Louis Hispanic Festival/Festival Hispano.  As in prior years, office staff and attorneys of the office were on hand and available through out the weekend of September 11, 12 and 13, 2009 to answer questions and provide information about the office and the various other organizations the office works with throughout the St. Louis Metropolitan area.  More information about the festival follows:

US Legal Solutions participated in the First Annual Festival of Hispanics and Nonprofits held at Our Lady of Guadalupe Church on August 23. The festival brought together local non-profits and a few select businesses that provide services to the Latino community in St. Louis with community members, in an effort to increase awareness and educate the community on the services and opportunities available in the Greater St. Louis area. The event was extended later in the day, to accommodate the higher-than-expected participation of the community. US Legal Solutions was proud to be part of such a successful event!

Gustavo Arango was interviewed as part of Colombian news program Teleantioquia's special report called "Migraciones: Una amenaza para quien?" The interview can be seen on YouTube in two parts: the first is here, and the second is here.

Gustavo Arango was featured on TeleMedellin as an expert on immigration to the United States. TeleMedellin is a very popular TV station in Medellin, Colombia. Gustavo's interview, which aired in late 2007, can be seen here.

Welcome to the US Legal Solutions Blog! Please check this page regularly for opinion pieces, updates on policies and laws, updates from academic research groups, changes at our office, celebrations, events, and more! Comments or questions? Please email Sara at sbollinger@us-legalsolutions.com. Thank you!

Bienvenidos al Blog de US Legal Solutions! Favor de visitar esta pagina con frecuencia para leer articulos de opinion, articulos informativos sobre politicas y leyes, nueva informacion de grupos academicos de investigacion, cambios en nuestra oficina, celebraciones, eventos, y mas! Comentarios o preguntas? Mande un email a la Srta. Sara al sbollinger@us-legalsolutions.com. Muchas gracias!