Archive for the ‘Interior Enforcement’ Category.

Is ICE Making Us Safer or Less Secure?

What is the mission of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)? Its website states:

ICE’s mission is to protect America from the cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national security and public safety. This mission is executed through the enforcement of more than 400 federal statutes and focuses on smart immigration enforcement, preventing terrorism and combating the illegal movement of people and goods.

In the past week, ICE has aggressively ramped up its enforcement efforts, sending shockwaves across the nation, as many ponder just how far ICE will go to execute the practically limitless deportation priorities laid out in President Trump’s January 25 Executive Order. The order casts a net so massive that ICE could easily shatter the record of people deported under President Obama. Trump’s actions have instilled fear and anxiety across immigrant communities, and has even spawned scam artists posing as ICE agents and demanding that immigrants pay up to avoid deportation.

Continue reading ‘Is ICE Making Us Safer or Less Secure?’ »

Why All the Worry Over Senator Sessions as Attorney General?

The veterans among us know all too well the vast power that the Attorney General of the United States (AG) has in immigration matters, but for those who are new to the practice of immigration law, or just interested members of the press or public, here is a primer on the power of this office only as it relates to immigration:

(1)   The AG has the power to remake the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). In 2002, Attorney General John Ashcroft decided to “streamline” BIA review of immigration decisions and he was able to do so without any enabling legislation because the BIA is a creature of regulations promulgated by the Attorney General. Before 2002, most immigration appeals were reviewed by three-judge panels which almost always issued written opinions. But Ashcroft changed that to require single-member review of most cases. He also cut the number of BIA members from 23 to 11and dismissed the more “pro-immigrant” members. Since that time, the board has grown to 17, but there is nothing to prevent our new AG from remaking the entire Board in whatever form he wishes.

Continue reading ‘Why All the Worry Over Senator Sessions as Attorney General?’ »

We Cannot Turn Away from Mesa Verde

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policies force hundreds of asylum seekers into detention in the Central Valley, one of the most rural parts of California. In March 2015, ICE contracted with GEO Group, a private prison company, to re-open the Mesa Verde Detention Facility in Bakersfield, California. Although ICE contracts with other jails throughout the state for bed space to house a limited number of immigrant detainees, Mesa Verde is a former prison that is now an immigrant-only detention center holding 400 individuals at any given time, the majority of them asylum-seekers. Mesa Verde is five hours away from the San Francisco immigration court, which has jurisdiction over all of the detainees’ cases. According to the San Francisco Immigration Court Administrator, the detained immigration court docket in San Francisco has nearly doubled since the opening of Mesa Verde.

Shortly after opening the detention center, ICE began transferring recently arrived asylum seekers there from the border. These asylum seekers are from countries throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin America and speak dozens of languages, including Spanish, English, French, and Haitian Creole.

Continue reading ‘We Cannot Turn Away from Mesa Verde’ »

Offering the Community Your Expertise Post-Election

shutterstock_522382048There is fear in our communities. In the days following the presidential election, I heard from a lot of people who want to help, but aren’t sure exactly how. Though there are many ways to get involved, I want to offer an example of how a fellow AILA member and I volunteered a couple of weekends ago. Perhaps it will serve as a road map for others to follow.

Two Sundays ago, AILA member Brad Thomson and I spoke at a large community gathering at the St. Mary’s Student Parish in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The event was organized by the fantastic folks at Washtenaw Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights (WICIR) and was supported by a number of other community organizations.

Continue reading ‘Offering the Community Your Expertise Post-Election’ »

The World is Watching

shutterstock_81287065By now, it is no longer a surprise to learn that many immigration lawyers, and the clients they serve, live in certain “hostile jurisdictions,” where it is almost impossible to win an asylum case no matter the facts. In places like Atlanta, Georgia, and Charlotte, North Carolina, people seeking asylum, and the attorneys fighting for them, know they are likely going to lose no matter how strong the case, or how real the fear. Going into this kind of battle expecting to lose takes a special type of courage, and a lot of support, because as a lawyer, you know that no matter how well prepared you are, no matter how much you think the law is on your side, the deck is still stacked against you.

But the deck shouldn’t be stacked against anyone because immigration law in the United States is, after all, federal law, and as such should be applied uniformly, from California to Georgia and from New York to Florida. An asylum claim presented in a court in California should be evaluated under the same law and have the same chances of approval as an asylum claim in Georgia or North Carolina. But AILA members know that this is simply not the case. We know that, no matter the facts, the claim of an asylum seeker in a hostile jurisdiction like Georgia or North Carolina is not evaluated under the same standards as asylum seekers in the rest of the United States.

Continue reading ‘The World is Watching’ »

Hostile Jurisdictions

shutterstock_372661681U.S. immigration lawyers, members of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), practice in every state in the union and other countries besides. We fight for clients no matter where they are, to the best of our abilities. However, we are currently wrestling with an elephant of a problem – hostile immigration court jurisdictions – best illustrated by the fact that the Atlanta immigration court consistently produces grant rates of relief far lower than the national average.  When you know that your client has virtually no chance of obtaining relief in your city and also know that if they were simply located in a different city they would have a better than two-thirds chance of relief, it can be disheartening, to say the least. Thus, there is an understandable reluctance among many attorneys to practice removal defense in Atlanta, one of the worst of our nation’s “hostile jurisdictions,” where no amount of time and effort can overcome a deck stacked firmly against the defense.

Continue reading ‘Hostile Jurisdictions’ »

Jimenez Moreno v. Napolitano: Immigration Detainers Require a Warrant

shutterstock_407008447The interior enforcement agency of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), employs various ways to co-opt state and local law enforcement to help it enforce the immigration laws. One of those tools, an immigration detainer, asks local law enforcement to hold the subject of the detainer for up to 48 hours so that ICE can take the person into immigration custody. The problem is that these detainers are issued without any regard for due process, and often without actually speaking with the subject of the detainer. Because of this, it is not surprising that ICE often gets it wrong.  For example:

Jose Jimenez Moreno, a 40-year-old United States citizen, was arrested in 2011 in Rockford, Illinois. Without ever interviewing or speaking to him, DHS issued an immigration detainer against him, and only canceled the detainer after a federal lawsuit was filed.

Continue reading ‘Jimenez Moreno v. Napolitano: Immigration Detainers Require a Warrant’ »

Enforcement Off the Rails

shutterstock_159241919There’s been a lot of news coverage of the ICE raids, of the aggressive tactics used to arrest vulnerable families at their homes and to arrest children on the way to school. But what hasn’t received as much coverage is the damage that raids victims endure after their arrest. Some remain trapped in prolonged ICE detention and suffer psychologically and physically.

My client Johanna* was subjected to three straight days of solitary confinement at an ICE detention center in Georgia. She is just 18 years old – a victim of rape and severe domestic violence in El Salvador who fled to the US over two years ago, all alone.

Continue reading ‘Enforcement Off the Rails’ »

Outrage

shutterstock_294714656

“Apurar, cielos, pretendo,

Por qué me tratáis así,

qué delito cometí

contra vosotros naciendo.

Aunque si nací, ya entiendo

qué delito he cometido;

bastante causa ha tenido

vuestra justicia y rigor,

Pues el delito mayor

del hombre es haber nacido.” ~ by Pedro Calderón de la Barca

Outrage is the only word that comes to mind to describe the Obama Administration’s recent admission that they are aggressively pursuing enforcement against families and children. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has launched a 30-day “surge” of arrests focused on mothers and children who have been ordered removed by an immigration judge. It was also reported that the operation would cover minors who have entered the country without a guardian and since turned 18 years of age.

Continue reading ‘Outrage’ »

The Un-American Nature of Prison Bed Quotas

shutterstock_170934761It has never been easy to be an immigration attorney.  Faced with combatting injustice without sufficient resources, those of us who represent detained immigrants have seen these challenges increase with the recent hyper-growth of the private prison industry (PPI): 1600% increase in the number of beds from 1990 to 2010.

More than half of the industry’s $3 billion in profits comes from the detention of immigrants.  Not surprisingly, due to PPI’s muscular lobbying efforts, there is scant congressional oversight of the industry.  Over time, GEO and CCA, the two largest for-profit prison companies in the U.S. have given more than $10 million to individual politicians and spent almost $25 million on lobbying Congress.

As a result, we now live in a country where immigrants are treated as commodities.  There are more than 200 detention facilities in the U.S. that operate under a congressional mandate of keeping 34,000 available beds per day.  Despite testimony by Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson that the 34,000 bed mandate is more of an availability target than a quota, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spends almost $2 billion a year, in part, on keeping these beds occupied. The result: a huge portion of the money is funneled to PPI.

Continue reading ‘The Un-American Nature of Prison Bed Quotas’ »