THE HILL: N. RAPPAPORT SAYS THAT EXPEDITED REMOVAL IS THE ANSWER TO IMMIGRATION COURT BACKLOGS – I DISAGREE!

Paul says, “Expedited removal is the wrong solution to the Immigration Court backlog!”

I never said it is the right solution. The point of my article is that Trump is not going to solve the immigration court backlog by adding more judges, and, I predict that when he realizes this, he will resort to expedited removal proceedings.

Paul says, “As I have noted in recent blogs, recent studies show that Immigration Court hearings area already falling substantially short of providing real due process because of lack of available counsel and overuse of immigration detention. Expedited removal would aggravate that problem tenfold.”

In a perfect world, every alien would be represented by someone with Paul’s ability and experience, but it isn’t going to happen in the world we live in. The immigration court is in a crisis. If you want an acceptable solution, you need to be realistic and make suggestions that Trump and a republican congress might find acceptable. Otherwise, they are going to do whatever they think is right, without regard to anything you have said.

Paul says, “Expedited removal couldn’t begin to solve the current backlog problems because the vast majority of the estimated 11 million individuals already here have been here for more than two years and can prove it, most from Government records. Indeed, I’d wager that the vast majority of individuals in Removal Proceedings in U.S. Immigration Court have had their cases pending for two or more years.”

I don’t know where Paul gets his statistics. PEW is the gold standard for estimates on how many aliens are here illegally, so I went to the website page where they explain their methods. Math was one of my majors in college, so I didn’t have any difficulty understanding their methods. Their estimates aren’t even intelligent guesses. Their numbers are absolutely worthless. If you want to know why I say that, see my article, “Does anyone really know how many undocumented aliens there are?
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/57e41782e4b09f67131e3e7c?timestamp=1474689173130

And I don’t think it is going to be as easy as Paul suggests for them to prove they have been here for two years. Moreover, if they are successful, the fact that they have been here for more than a year will make them ineligible for asylum, which for most, perhaps 90 some percent of the undocumented aliens, is the only relief they might be eligible for.

Paul says, “The problems in Immigration Court were caused by “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” by the last three Administrations emanating from undue political influence from the Department of Justice, DHS, and the White House. Only an independent Immigration Court that places control of the dockets in individual Immigration Judges, where it belongs, can address those problems.”
It doesn’t matter why the court has such an enormous backlog. The only thing that matters is to find a way to bring it down to a manageable level.

Paul says,“The answer to hiring problems resulting from poor management and political hiring from the DOJ is certainly not to “get rid of” any existing U.S. Immigration Judges. Whether the hiring was done properly or not, there is no reason to believe that any of the currently sitting local U.S. Immigration Judges did anything wrong or participated in the hiring process other than by applying for the jobs. The system needs all the experienced judges it currently has.”

I never said I think immigration judges should be fired. The chairman of Judiciary and the chairman of the immigration subcommittee think the various administrations have packed the board and the immigration court with politically biased people. If that is true and the judges who are biased can’t put aside their bias and apply the law objective, something has to be done about them.

Paul says, “The problem of inconsistency will only be solved by having an independent BIA that acts in the manner of an independent appellate court, cracking down on those judges who are not correctly applying legal standards. That’s how all other court systems address consistency issues — through precedent and independent appellate review.”

The only way to do that would be to fire all of the board members and all of the judges, and start over with a court system similar to the tax court, staffing it with people who have proven their objectivity. My guess is that that would be most of the judges and most of the board members, but not all of them in either group.

Paul says, “Numerous examples have been documented of Immigration Judges in courts like Atlanta, Stewart, and Charlotte, to name three of the most notorious ones, improperly denying asylum claims and mistreating asylum applicants. The BIA has failed to function in a proper, independent manner ever since the “Ashcroft Purge.” The only way to get it doing its job is by creating true judicial independence.”

Which is it, Paul? Are there judges who shouldn’t have been hired and need to be fired, or not?

Paul says, “The docket does need to be trimmed. The Obama Administration was at least starting the process by a more widespread use of prosecutorial discretion or “PD” as in all other major law enforcement prosecutorial offices. Most of the individuals currently in the country without status are assets to the country, who have built up substantial equities, and do not belong in removal proceedings. No system can function with the type of unregulated, irrational, “gonzo” enforcement this Administration is pursuing.”

Is there any reason for thinking that Sessions will get rid of judges who are denying too many asylum cases?

Paul says, “The reasonable solution is to do what is necessary to build a well-functioning system that provides due process efficiently, as it is supposed to do. The elements are reasonable access to lawyers for everyone in proceedings, reducing expensive, wasteful, and fundamentally unfair use of detention, better merit hiring and training procedures for Immigration Judges, modern technology, better use of prosecutorial discretion by the DHS, legislation to grant legal status to law-abiding productive individuals currently present in the US without status, and a truly independent judicial system that can develop in the way judicial systems are supposed to — without political meddling and without more “haste makes waste” schemes like “expedited removal!”

We might as well wish for an immigration court that provides Harvard lawyers for every alien. The backlog crisis is going to be solved by reducing the caseload, not by providing more due process to the aliens, whether that is right or not.

Gentleman: I can confirm that Expedited Removal is on the move. We have clients being moved from Farmville who are eligible for relief (without any reason) to Texas, even though they already have MCH scheduled and bond redeterminations hearings in Arlington already set up. Judges are granting COV to other jurisdictions at the behest of DHS.

Bed space issue? Possibly, but unlikely, given the directives of this current administration. More likely, moving out the people they want to get rid of sooner than later, without due process and creating very difficult circumstances for supporters of the “accused” to appear on behalf of the respondent. We are still waiting on Texas to schedule bond hearings, weeks after the initial detention in Virginia, without much hope the bond hearings will be expeditious or it will be fruitful.

Sad days ahead for Republicans, yet sadder for those undermined by their sadistic policies. Have you seen the “tax reform” bill? Maybe Alabama will be another state to tumble away from both the ultra-right wing and their “swampy” counterparts, and realize once and for all, that America does stand for justice, for all, not just the whites. Maybe due process – can have its day in court at last?

Has Nolan Rappaport ever met an alien? Or just read about them in the *news* or in a legal brief? Sitting at your desk at the BIA and making decisions about human beings’ lives must be surreal. Probably a good intellectual exercise without much meaning. Except the results of those decisions have a distinct meaning for those who are actually affected by it.

Staring down at the humble masses who gather in your courtroom, begging for mercy, and making their cases, well that, is an entirely different game.

I would like to re-extend my invitation for Nolan to come meet one or two of our clients in our office. In spite of his retired status, his “occasional contributions” to The Hill seem to be more and more numerous. Perhaps he will take me up on the offer this time? Olive branch extended.

Hopeful it will be accepted…..But not so naive to think that Nolan won’t pick apart my post piece by piece, looking for a way to feel justified in his opinion, and to defend his *opinion* post. After all, that’s the Republican way….