All posts by Ray Garrido

DHS radically expands Expedited Removal

On July 22, 2019, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a new policy designed to dramatically expand expedited removal to apply throughout the United States to anyone who has been in the U.S. for less than two years.

The policy will take effect on July 23, 2019, before the public has the opportunity to comment.

Expedited removal gives near-total authority to immigration officers to apprehend, cast judgment upon, and remove someone from this country.

Now DHS seeks to apply that power nationwide, subjecting thousands of people to deportation without a meaningful chance to collect evidence, consult with an attorney, or come before a judge.

Under the new rule, people will be denied a fair day in court even if they might qualify for legal relief.

The administration’s answer to the humanitarian situation at our southern border should be to improve the immigration court system; instead DHS is eliminating the judges from the process altogether.

That is not the kind of due process envisioned in the Constitution.

Thanks to the American Immigration Lawyers (AILA) for this information.

The misinformation campaign continues

The latest case-by-case records from the Immigration Courts indicate that as of the end of May 2019 one or more removal hearings had already been held for nearly 47,000 newly arriving families seeking refuge in this country. Of these, almost six out of every seven families released from custody had shown up for their initial court hearing. Usually multiple hearings are required before a case is decided. For those who are represented, more than 99 percent had appeared at every hearing held. See Figure 1. Thus, court records directly contradict the widely quoted claim that “90 Percent of Recent Asylum Seekers Skipped Their Hearings.[1]
Families who attend immigration court hearingsFigure 1. Attendance at Immigration Court Hearings
by Families After Release
(Click for a graphic)

Under our current system, there is no legal requirement that immigrants actually receive notice, let alone timely notice, of their hearing. Given many problems in court records on attendance and in the system for notifying families of the place and time of their hearings, these appearance rates were remarkably high.

This is an excerpt of a report by TRAC at Syracuse University. The view the full report click here.