Derrick M. Donchak (izq.) y Brandon J. Piekarsky

Los dos jóvenes encarcelados por participar en la golpiza que le quitó la vida a un inmigrante indocumentado pedirán que se les realice un nuevo juicio, informó Peter Bortner del Republican Herald de Pottsville, Pensilvania.

Un panel de tres jueces del Tercer Circuito de la Tribunal Supremo de Apelaciones, con sede en Filadelfia, escuchará lo argumentos de los abogados William A. Fetterhoff y James A. Swetz, que defienden a Donchak y Piekarsky, respectivamente.Brandon Piekarsky y Derrick Donchak fueron encontrados culpables de participar en la golpiza que mató a Luis Eduardo Ramírez Zavala, un indocumentado mexicano, en el pueblo de Shenandoah, Pensilvania, el 12 de julio de 2008.

El panel que escuchará los argumentos está compuesto por los jueces Theodore A. McKee, Julio M. Fuentes y Kent A. Jordan.

Bortner escribe (y yo traduzco):

Fetterhoff y Swetz alegaron ante el 3er Circuito que el juicio federal violó los derechos de sus clientes a ser protegidos de ser juzgados dos veces por el mismo delito. También argumentaron que el Juez Superior Federal de Distrito, Richard Caputo, se equivocó en su interpretación de la Ley para la Equidad en la Vivienda (Fair Housing Act), medida bajo la cual Donchak y Piekarsky fueron condenados.

La Quinta Enmienda de la Constitución de Estados Unidos indica, entre otras cosas, que nadie puede ser juzgado dos veces por el mismo delito.

Donchak cumple su sentencia en FCI/McKean, en Bradford, Pensilvania, mientras que Piekarsky purga la suya en FCI/Beckley, en West Virginia.

No se sabe cuándo los jueces emitirán su fallo.

Aquí pueden encontrar más información sobre este caso.

Los dos jóvenes activistas se encuentran en un centro de detención de Louisiana.

Apenas pude ver bien este video. Se trata de Jonathan Pérez e Isaac Barrera, dos jóvenes indocumentados que entraron caminando a la oficina de Inmigración y Protección de Aduanas (ICE) en Mobile, Alabama, para declarar su estatus migratorio y ser detenidos.

Pérez comentó esto a ColorLines.com:

“Estamos ejerciendo nuestro poder y mostrando que podemos hacer algo al respecto de este problema”, dijo Pérez. “Podemos retar al sistema, y cuando lo hacemos, el sistema se viene abajo y comienzan a emerger las contradicciones”.

Esta acción fue coordinada a través de la red DreamActivist.org, que en su sitio explica que la intensión era mostrar que las autoridades migratorias aplican la ley de manera distinta cuando los jóvenes indocumentados detenidos cuentan con la atención de los medios.

Esta acción ocurrió apenas un par de días después de que 13 personas, entre jóvenes y adultos, realizaran una acto de desobediencia civil en la capital de Alabama en protesta contra las leyes migratorias.

Pero en este caso fue diferente. El video los muestra hablando con dos agentes de la dependencia, a quienes les dicen que están “muy molestos con su trabajo” y después declaran su estatus.

Ambos jóvenes fueron detenidos, procesados y envíados al centro de detención South Louisiana Correctional Center, de acuerdo a ColorLines.

El sitio contactó al portavoz de ICE, Temple Black, quien explicó que no se les había fijado una detención por el momento.

En tanto, DreamActivist.org asegura que ambos muchachos están organizando y colectando las historias de los demás inmigrantes que se encuentran detenidos con ellos en aquel centro.

También se ha lanzando una campaña en línea para colectar firmas con el fin de presionar a las autoridades a que liberen a Pérez y Barrera.

Ilustración de Melanie Cervantes de Dignidadrebelde.com en colaboración con Chris Crass.

Las condiciones en las que viven los inmigrantes y refugiados en este país deben ser una cuestión que se incluya dentro de los reclamos de los movimientos Occupy en todo el país.

“El 99 por ciento no está aún ahí. Creo que aún no están ahí representadas todas las voces. Y es difícil porque no es tan facil que comunidades como las inmigrantes y otras estén ahí por el miedo y riesgo que corren al enfrentarse a la policía’, me dijo el aritsta gráfico Cesar Maxit en una conversación telefónica reciente.

Su análisis es certero. Y es que con las cerca de 400,000 deportaciones que la administración de Barack Obama ‘logró’ en el año fiscal que recién terminó, no parece haber garantías para los inmigrantes indocumentados en este país.

A esto se le debe sumar la lista de leyes y ordenanzas antiinmigrantes que hacen blanco de esta comunidad en muchos lugares.

Pero esto no ha detenido a varios grupos, como en Nueva York o Atlanta, donde organizaciones ya han realizado actos solidarios con el grueso de los Indignados.

En el campamento de Occupy Wall Street ya han comenzado a dar entrenamientos y sesiones informativas para inmigrantes que quieran adherirse al movimiento, según informa Fox News Latino:

Dijo que se están ofreciendo clases para los indocumentados que se quieran unir, en los cuales se expertos legales y abogados atienden las preguntas que los inmigrantes pudieran tener, sus preocupaciones, y explican cómo lidiar con situaciones extremas que pudieran ocurrir ante un enfrentamiento con la policía. Las clases ofrecen una perspectiva a la forma en la que operan los policías e intruyen sobre los derechos que tienen los inmigrantes.

“Una vez que ellos conocen las demandas y saben los riesgos que existen, está en ellos el tomar la decisión”, dijo Muñoz. “A veces, las demandas y la causa son más importantes que la deportación”.

Esto no debe ser sorpresa alguna. Por el contrario, los inmigrantes forman parte del gran movimiento luchando por dignidad, justicia, transparencia, libertad y una mejor vida. Claro que la lista es más larga que estos cinco elementos, pero entre más crece el listado más puntos en común hay entre ambos grupos.

Al igual que las clases desposeídas, los inmigrantes son duramente afectados por las políticas económicas que colocan a las ganancias por encima de las personas. Al igual que las clases desposeídas, la cabeza de cada inmigrante tiene un precio para el sistema carcelario con fines de lucro.

Las diferentes compañías que operan los centros de detención para inmigrantes se benefician económicamente por mantener encerrados a los cientos de miles de personas aprehendidas gracias a la persecución oficializada a través de programas como Comunidades Seguras (Secure Communities), 287g y las diferentes leyes estatales, como en Arizona, Georgia o Alabama.

Las tres compañías a cargo de los diferentes centros de detención—Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), The Geo Group y Management and Training Corporation—cosechan ganancias por encima de los $5 mil millones anuales, de acuerdo a reportes que ya son del dominio público.

Muchas de estas cárceles son la única fuente de empleo para localidades sumergidas en la pobreza. Tenemos así un caso de pobres encarcelando a los pobres, mientras que las corporaciones ensanchan sus bolsillos a costa de todos ellos.

Esto nos demuestra la compatibilidad de causas, la conjunción de furias. Justo cuando el movimiento cumple dos meses, esta unidad se evidenció más cuando el pasado 15 de noviembre la policía de Oakland, California, detuvo a Francisco ‘Pancho’ Ramos Stierle, un indocumentado súper conocido en la zona de la Bahía por su participación en varios círculos de meditación.

La historia de ‘Pancho’ llama la atención por sí misma. Este indocumentado vino a Estados Unidos hace seis años a estudiar un doctorado en astrofísica en la Universidad de California en Berkeley, pero abandonó la escuela al darse cuenta que sus estudios eran parte de una investigación para crear “bomas más seguras”.

Ramos Stierle permaneció de manera irregular en el país y finalmente cayó bajo las manos de ‘la migra’ cuando la policía desalojó la Plaza Oscar Grant frente a la alcaldía de aquella ciudad.

Mientras este inmigrante meditaba  en medio del desalojo, los agentes lo arrestaron bajó los cargos de “no dispersarse y merodear”. Tras su arresto, Inmigración y Protección de Aduanas (ICE) lo tomó bajo custodia y lo puso en libertad condicional en espera de su audiencia en un tribunal migratorio.

Para muchos, este caso por sí solo ha puesto el tema migratorio al frente de los reclamos que hacen los Indignados en las cientos de Ocupaciones que hay en Estados Unidos.

Sin embargo, la criminalización de los inmigrantes no se remite solamente a la detención de Ramos Stierle en el campamento del 99 por ciento.

Al sur del mismo estado, otros inmigrantes también tomaban la bandera del 99 por ciento.

Poco después de la detención de Stierle, más de 100 conserjes protestaron frente a la oficina de ICE en San Diego contra el trato que reciben bajo las actuales leyes migratorias.

Traducido del sitio Fronterasdesk.org:

Los conserjes sindicalizados protestaban el enfoque de la administración Obama en aplicar las leyes migratorias en vez de reformarlas.

“Estamos cansados de los ataques a los inmigrantes, a la gente trabajadora”, dijo Rosa López, una líder dentro del sindicato y conserje que trabaja en el centro de San Diego. “Trabajamos muy duro cada noche limpiando los baños que nadie más quiere limpiar”.

Los manifestantes cantaron “¡Nosotros somos el 99 por ciento!” tomando prestado el ahora famoso grito de batalla del movimiento Occupy Wall Street.

“Mucha de la discusión sobre el 99 por ciento ha transcurrido sin que se hable del verdadero fondo del 99 por ciento, la fuerza laboral inmigrante”, dijo Lorena González, secretaria-tesorera del San Diego Labor Council.

Mucho se había criticado al movimiento Occupy por no haber incluído estas voces que, por su parte, ya han venido realizando trabajo en pro de la reforma migratoria y en pos de derechos, salarios y condiciones dignas de vida y de trabajo.

Al incluir a estos grupos, el movimiento Occupy sólo se puede fortalecer y así completar al 99 por ciento.

From Colorlines.com

We learned today that SB1070 author Russell Pearce was kicked out of his Arizona State Senate seat in an unprecedented recall election.

The Arizona Republic compiled some of the reactions after the election results, including Ruben Navarrette’s tweet: Ladies and Gentlemen, Evil has left the building. Muy bien hecho, ‘Zonies..

As many states jumped onto the immigration enforcement bandwagon, it would be interesting to see if people in all those places will follow suit and kick out the legislators that promoted their strict immigration initiatives.

Any thoughts?

PA driver's license image from PADUIBlog.com

Just last week many of y’all read about the six immigrants in Pennsylvania who got to keep their driver’s licenses after a court ruled in their favor.

I asked ACLU attorney Valerie Burch to explain in simple terms what this ruling mean for her clients and at least 1,100 other people who saw their licenses revoked last year.

I also had the chance to talk to Desi Burnette with the Media Mobilizing Project, and she told me they have set up an email to receive more cases from people whose licenses were revoked. The email is licencias@mediamobilizing.org.

Now, here’s part of the exchange I had with Valerie Burch:

Mojado Citizen: Does this mean the case is over?

Valerie Burch: The case is over unless PennDOT decides to request review by the PA Supreme Court. Even if PennDOT requests review, the PA Supreme Court need not give it. If it requests review, PennDOT must do so by Nov. 10.

MC: What’s going to happen with their licenses once they expire?

VB:Once the clients’ licenses expire, they will have to renew the licenses as anyone would. Because they are noncitizens, they must, at the time of renewal, present documents “indicating continued legal presence in the United States.” Section 1514(e)(3) of the PA Vehicle Code. Note: People with pending applications (e.g. to adjust status, for asylum, etc.) are legally present for purposes of this law. The documents that may be required are listed in Pub. 195 “Identification and Legal Presence Requirements for Non-United States Citizens.” According to Pub 195 (and, implicitly, the decision of the Commonwealth Court), people who do not have SSN’s may be required to instead present an ITIN and “a letter from SSA indicating that SSA did not make a decision yet, or SSA rejection letter.” Here lies a pitfall. PennDOT has failed to provide us with a clear statement on what the SSA letters must say. Clients have presented letters to PennDOT, and the ones presented weren’t what the PennDOT lawyers were looking for. I’ve called the SSA and asked how we can get the “right” SSA letters containing the magic words–whatever they are… The SSA staff who would speak with me told me to ask PennDOT. They didn’t know what I was talking about. If PennDOT wants to be safe (and fair), it will work with the SSA (and other stakeholders including ACLU-PA and AILA) to clarify what these letters must say and how to get one. This whole debacle arose when PennDOT asked the SSA to verify the identity of drivers. The SSA couldn’t do that for ITIN users. So, for people without SSNs, PennDOT seems to want the SSA to say, ‘Yeah, we checked this person’s immigration status using all the right documents, which he showed us, and we decided that he’s not eligible for a SSN.’ I don’t think that the SSA is in the business of telling people so definitively that they are ineligible for SSNs. I have never seen a letter saying, explicitly, ‘Mr. X is not eligible for a SSN.” Instead, I’ve seen noncomittal letters effectively saying, ‘We didn’t give you a SSN because you didn’t show us the documents you need to obtain a SSN.’ Does this mean that the person is ineligible for a SSN? Probably! But, it doesn’t satisfy PennDOT. PennDOT isn’t being clear about its request to the SSA, and immigrant drivers are caught in the middle–treated as if THEY must bear the burden of working out this bureaucratic communications nightmare. And worse, they have everything to lose . . . like their jobs . . . as pizza delivery guys, etc. Thankfully, the Commonwealth Court said, no, it’s not their problem. It’s PennDOT’s problem. Implicit in the ruling is the conclusion that PennDOT must clearly define the contents of the SSA letters and give people notice and a meaningful opportunity to either obtain the letters or explain why they couldn’t. This process is due them because, in 2011, people have a right to their drivers’ licenses. I do worry that PennDOT will fail to clarify the SSA letter requirement and summarily refuse to renew licenses because a driver has failed to present an SSA letter containing the magic words. I worry about this because it’s not clear to me that people have as much of a right to renew their licenses as they do to avoid their cancellation. Due process is only required when important rights are at stake. I’m not so sure that a person has the right to renew a license. A person does, however, have a right not to be discriminated against, based on national origin, in obtaining government-issued licenses and benefits. My hope is that I won’t have to litigate that issue and that PennDOT will either drop the SSA letter requirement altogether or work with the SSA and stakeholders to ensure that everyone who is not entitled to a SSN can easily get an SSA letter containing the magic words. The SSA letters are silly anyway. They don’t prove a thing about the person’s identity. If the SSA doesn’t have a record of your SSN, then it can’t verify your identity.

MC:What does this mean to the thousands of people that got their licenses revoked?
VB:I’m still researching the answer to this last question. If a person’s license was cancelled in violation of due process–the same way these 6 were cancelled–and that person stopped driving, believing herself ineligible to do so, and suffered great harm (i.e. lost her job) as a result, then she might have a remedy available to her. We hope to issue an advisory on this . . . once I figure it out . . .

From mi artículo in MundoHispánico.com

Para mí el Spanglish didn’t come easy, pero it did come bien natural.

After growing up in Spanish and learning English, I just had to move to the Juárez-El Paso border to make it mine, or, rather, to become a part of it.

Spanglish es pues, lo que hablo, lo que escribo. It is who I am. Lo busco and when I find it, lo celebro. That’s the reason behind this post.

Apenas esta semana escribí para MundoHispánico a story on how Spanglish lives among us.

From streets and classrooms, esta herramienta de comunicación has reached the media, only reflecting la realidad en la que vivimos en este país.

From MundoHispánico:

Una carcajada en spanglish

Y aunque hay quien disputa esa aseveración, la presencia del spanglish es palpable a tal grado que es material de trabajo del comediante Bill Santiago, quien lo utiliza para conectarse con su público.

“La gente lo escucha y pronto se relaciona con lo que estoy diciendo y dice ‘ese es el mundo en el que crecí, los dos idiomas que yo veía convivir’”, dijo.

Estudioso del lenguaje, Santiago es un periodista que a través del humor resalta su fascinación por un habla que muchos tachan de inferior.

“Siempre digo que el spanglish es el doble de vocabulario, pero la mitad de la gramática”, dijo a manera de broma.

Además de su comedia, Santiago publicó un libro titulado Pardon My Spanglish, en el que aborda el tema desde un punto de vista más relajado.

“El libro dice que el spanglish no es algo malo, sino una forma muy creativa que la gente que habla los dos idiomas usa para comunicarse”, explicó el comediante.

Por estas razones I was very excited cuando I saw an NPR piece where el poeta, y mi tocayo, Gustavo Firmat speaks about his life in and between two languages (and histories, I must add).

From the NPR piece:

There are not only mother tongues. There are also father tongues, and sister tongues, and lover tongues, and brother tongues, and son tongues.
When I think of Spanish I hear my father’s voice. When I think of English, what do I hear? I hear that my children’s voices. I hear my wife’s voice. And so, my tongue ties, my effective relations with those two languages are really quite, quite distinct.

MONTAGNE: Are there phrases, expressions, words that you can only say in English and others that really you can only say in Spanish?

FIRMAT: Well, the first thing that occurs to me is that I basically can only curse in Spanish. I had a difficult relationship with my dad and there may have been some cursing involved in both parts. And there’s this kind of anger, this kind of effect. On the other hand, I have a hard time saying I love you in Spanish. When I say te quiero, ti amo, it sounds stilted. It sounds like the kind of speech you here in Mexican soap operas.

But for me, it’s very natural to say I love you. My wife is American. English is a conjugal tongue. It’s a filial tongue. Every time I talk to my son or my daughter, we end the discussion by saying I love you.

MONTAGNE: Does that then when you write in a combination of both languages, does that make it whole?

FIRMAT: Well, I think that’s, for me, that’s what Spanglish represents, this impossible dream of wholeness. And, you know, languages define your personality. And sometimes I have the sense that I’m a different person in Spanish than I am in English, that my Cuban Joe(ph) doesn’t quite understand my American high. And I think that’s a very common experience of bilinguals.

I agree when he says that there’s more than just a mother tongue. Es cierto que hay relaciones that can be just felt in one language, porque la lengua goes beyond what’s spoken. But, unlike Firmat, I love having the option of two languages porque me han enseñado mundos y vidas that would be out of reach otherwise.

This story began last year when PennDOT sent out thousands of letters to drivers whose Social Security numbers did not match the Social Security Administration database.

The agency suspended almost 1,100 licenses after determining that the identification numbers on those applications were not actual socials.

In April, 2010, I wrote the following about these folks for Philadelphia Weekly:

Without the benefit of legal counsel, six South American immigrants waged a court battle against the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) and won the right to keep their driving privileges after the agency arbitrarily suspended them. The group didn’t plan on rising up against the agency without legal representation, but they couldn’t get a lawyer to touch their individual (or collective) cases. They were told it was better to keep quiet and not fight authority. Easier to just accept that their driver’s licenses had been revoked.
But María del Pilar Serna de Andrade, William Posada, Jesse Latorre, Pedro Camargo, Sandra González and Juan Carlos Ramírez were not prepared to do that. Their livelihoods depended on standing up to PennDOT, together. “We didn’t know each other up until this case,” says Colombian native Serna de Andrade.

Thanks to this story and to the work and support from the Media Mobilizing Project, the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania took this case.

In an AP story, Valerie Burch, the ACLU attorney representing the six, implied that this is not only a win for her clients but also for others in similar positions.

From the AP:

A lawyer for the six, Valerie Burch, of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, said Tuesday the decision was a win for her clients and others in similar positions.

PennDOT, Burch said, “would have to send a new notice out and give them an opportunity to respond and say what it is the client has to provide. And frankly, we aren’t worried about providing the required documents because these people are eligible for driver’s licenses.”

The IERB will go after officials and government employees that don't comply with the E-Verify component in HB87. Image taken from America's Voice blog.

Governor Nathan Deal once more ignored those against HB87 and kept controversial columnist Phil Kent in the seven-member Georgia Immigration Enforcement Review Boardthat will hold its first meeting at noon this Thursday.

The proposed agenda says the board will elect a chairman as well as discussing how to file a complaint and what committees will exist.

But the opposition prepares one last action before the panel meets for the first time. The coalition will deliver some 5,000 signatures gathered through an online petition the Young Georgia Democrats created.

This board was created under provision 20 of Georgia’s immigration law HB87, which gives this board the power to investigate public officials and government employees suspect of not complying with the law.

In a recent blog post, immigration attorney Charles Kuck called this board a “radical privatization of government power, and the constitutionality of this provision is suspect.”

From Kuck’s post:

After all we are talking about giving to a Board of private citizens the power to take away the “city” status of a municipality. Frankly, it is insane that this provision is in this anti-immigration bill. It has nothing to do with immigration, and everything to do with pleasing a particular constituency. Ultimately, the courts will decide the constitutionality of this Section.

This panel will make sure that localities, public officials and government employees adhere to the E-Verify provisions in the law.

America’s Voice does a good job explaining what E-Verify is for those who don’t know.

And although some small towns are already complying with the law, Bloomberg reports that by doing so they struggle finding ways to avoid the harsh penalties.

Las posturas sobre inmigración de Phil Kent se han calificado de extremas.

Governor Nathan Deal keeps alive the spark of his much-criticized choice for the state immigration review board.

After naming Phil Kent to take one seat of the seven-member board, both the governor and Kent himself have faced increased opposition from pro immigrant organizations and even journalists.

In a recent street interview, Deal was asked if he supported Kent’s views on multiculturalism, to which he answered that he wasn’t aware of those views and that they didn’t matter for the post he was required to do.

From 11Alive.com:

Governor Nathan Deal wanted supporters of tougher immigration laws on the state’s new immigration enforcement review board, and he found one in Phil Kent — one of three Deal appointees to the seven member panel.

“I think he’s qualified. He’s somebody who supports the statute (HB 87) that he is being asked to be a part of the implementation of,” Deal told 11Alive News before tossing the coin at the football game between North Hall High School and Gainesville High School Friday.

Yet, many of his critics call for a revision of these same opinions that Kent has published and can be found on his website.

The Young Georgia Democrats started an online petition that is already making its rounds through social media, demanding governor Deal to oust Kent from his recently-appointed seat.

In a series of opinions, Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s columnist Jay Bookman has directed attention to Kent’s columns in which he argues that America’s “white culture” is at risk with the recent exponential growth of minorities.

From one of Bookman’s pieces:

After all, Deal has appointed Kent to serve as one of his three representatives on a powerful new seven-member state immigration panel. Kent also has a documented history of inflammatory statements regarding immigration and race.

For example, Kent has warned that non-white babies now outnumber white babies, wondering what it will “mean to be white after ‘whiteness’ no longer defines the cultural mainstream.” He has opposed letting Somali war refugees into the country, referring to them as “primitive peoples,” and predicts that as the country becomes more diverse, white Americans will be disadvantaged and “flee into whiteness.”

Bill Nigut, Southeast Regional Director of Anti-Defamation League, asked the governor to consider whether Kent’s presence on the board “will undermine its authority, suggesting that the board’s agenda will not be simply to assure compliance with the new statute, but rather to pursue an anti-immigrant political agenda.”

From Nigut’s letter:

“Mr. Kent’s fixation with maintaining white culture is deeply disturbing, and his resort to fear mongering about undocumented residents is equally abhorrent. Both make him an unsuitable candidate to serve on any state panel or board, much less one dedicated to enforcing immigration laws. Georgia’s new immigration law has become a lightning rod for controversy. Mr. Kent’s presence on the Immigration Enforcement Review Board will simply stir up even more controversy and bring possible discredit to the state’s efforts to control illegal immigration.”

Kent has countered saying that he’s not surprised that who he calls his enemies are lambasting him for exercising his freedom of speech.

From Kent’s letter:

Why doesn’t Bookman want me on a panel overseeing compliance with Georgia’s immigration control law? Because he doesn’t want it used, that’s why. He hates the law, the board and me because of my opposition to the open borders lobby. And in a thinly veiled effort to prevent the implementation of this public safety measure, he takes selective quotations from my writings and analysis of our nation’s changing demographics to discredit my calls for strict enforcement of immigration laws.

Kent is a conservative journalist and commentator who has a public relations firm in Atlanta. He is also the spokesperson for Americans for Immigration Control, organization that the Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled a hate group.

This immigration review board was created by the state’s harsh immigration bill, HB87.

This board, and each of its members will have court-like powers, and will be able to investigate complaints, hold hearings, subpoena documents and witnesses, and take disciplinary action. Public employees or officials found to have “knowingly and willfully violated or failed to abide by” the laws can be punished by a fine of up to $5,000.

The board is set to have its first meeting Oct. 1.

Freedom University will start its free course in October at a location in Athens, Georgia.

UPDATE: Freedom University just launched a fundraising site where they ask for donations and also link to their Amazon wish list. According to the site, “All funds will go toward the cost of books, materials, and transportation to ensure that all students receive the education they deserve.”

Undocumented students who can’t enroll at any of the Georgia colleges or universities have a chance to experience higher education after a group of professors from the University of Georgia started taking applications for what has been called Freedom University.

UGA professor Lorgia García Peña told me in an interview for MundoHispánico that apart from fighting for the Georgia laws to end, the idea propelling this initiative is to give as many undocumented youth the opportunity to get what currently is close to impossible in this state: a college education.

“The idea is that those who enroll in this free class can be exposed to the kind of course they would be taking in their freshman year,” she said.

García Peña explained that this free class will touch on the American Experience through the lens of immigration and history.

The only requisites to join this once-a-month class are to have a high school diploma or GED and show commitment, the teacher said.

The deadline to apply is September 15 and those interested can find more information at their recently-launched web site.

Freedom University comes at a time when undocumented students in Georgia cannot easily enroll in the top five universities in Georgia due to a ban the State Board of Regents approved last fall.

At the national level, undocumented youth continue with their actions of civil disobedience furthering their fight for the passage of the DREAM Act, piece of legislation that turned 10 years old last August.

At the time, there were only 501 undocumented students—close to 1 percent of the total student population—attending these universities.

The Migration Policy Institute estimates there are some 74,000 potential DREAM Act beneficiaries living in Georgia.