US Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) – Page 6

🇺🇸⚖️🗽AMERICANS MUST REJECT THE FAR-RIGHT’S FICTIONAL “INVASION” CHARADE & THE REST OF THE BOGUS ANTI-IMMIGRANT AGENDA — It’s Racism, Pure & Simple — There Is No “Invasion,” “Replacement Theory” Is A Racist Trope, The Borders Aren’t “Open,” Asylum Seekers Aren’t Trafficking Fentanyl (the very suggestion is facially absurd), & There Is More Than Enough Detention & Enforcement, Just Not Very Smart, Effective, Or, In Some Cases, Even Legal!☠️

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/01/republican-immigration-ads-invasion/

By Paul Waldman and Greg Sargent in WashPost:

. . . .

But over the airwaves and online, another story is playing out: an absolute torrent of ads meant to frighten and anger voters about immigration.

A new report from the pro-immigration group America’s Voice seeks to document this ongoing phenomenon. One of its key conclusions: “Republicans have made their nativist narrative a top messaging priority.”

In the world of Republican campaign ads, very little has changed since the xenophobic Trump presidency, and some of what’s in these ads is truly repellent.

Three themes dominate these ads, the report finds, and they are all wildly inflammatory and profoundly dishonest: The Biden administration has created “open borders,” undocumented immigrants are responsible for fentanyl overdoses and a full-blown “invasion” is underway.

The borders are anything but open; the Biden administration is pursuing, arresting and deporting people seeking to come to the United States by the thousands. The vast majority of fentanyl that comes in is smuggled through ports of entry in cars, boats and planes, not carried by undocumented immigrants. And as for an “invasion,” that’s no more true now than it was when Trump warned that caravans were about to overrun the country.

But the Republican ads portray horror and chaos — usually with a non-White face. Some ads show pictures of young Black men walking through rivers on their way to “invade” America, with language suggesting this “invasion” brings “terrorists, drugs and crime.”

Other ads say the Biden administration is supposedly “importing 20 million illegals and giving them amnesty” (the image for that one is people in Haiti), which can only be stopped by “a declaration of invasion.”

In some ads it’s not just an open border but a “wide open border” — once again, illustrated with pictures of Haitians. In others we’re told that “human, sex and drug trafficking are out of control because of Democrat governance,” while Democratic candidates “refuse to oppose Biden’s open border policy.”

Of course, there is no open border policy, but why should the fact that it doesn’t exist stop Democrats from opposing it? That just shows how sinister they are, these ads say, because they “want to destroy this country.”

All of this captures something essential about this political moment. For months, Republicans were certain they could spread fears of chaos in order to ride to victory in the midterms. They’d run on crime and immigration, not just to excite the base but also to scare unsettled swing voters.

Yet the dynamic unexpectedly shifted, and now disorder and, dare we say it, crime — as in the potential crimes of Donald Trump and many Jan. 6 defendants — are not necessarily playing in the GOP’s favor. The overturning of Roe v. Wade has unleashed another form of chaos and a host of new dangers threatening women. And all of these things are energizing Democrats.

. . . .

“Republicans are indulging in the worst kind of White nationalist rhetoric,” Frank Sharry, the executive director of America’s Voice, told us. “And an issue they thought would win over swing voters is at best a base mobilizer for voters they already have.”

What makes this all really ugly, however, is that the messaging remaining under the radar — which Democrats bear some blame for, having gone quiet on the issue — allows it to continue mostly unexamined. This, even though its worst incarnations — such as “great replacement theory” — have inspired recent mass shootings.

Along these lines, it’s worth keeping an eye on Blake Masters, the GOP Senate candidate in Arizona. He has trafficked heavily in great replacement theory and has run truly vile ads on immigration, including one that features machine-gun fire at the border. Yet in a place President Biden won by a whisker that’s also a border state, Masters is trailing by a meaningful margin.

As Sharry told us, Masters’s whole “declare an invasion” line “is not working, in a state where one-third of the voters are independents and border security is a top issue.”

Yet whether it works with independents and swing voters, this foul sewage has been flowing unabated. And it will surely continue to do so.

********************

Read the complete article at the link.

The idea that individuals seeking to find a U.S. official who will listen to their asylum cases would be trucking along large amounts of fentanyl in their backpacks is facially absurd.

Ending scofflaw Trump failures to follow asylum and refugee laws at the border and beyond would not halt all illegal entries. No policy will do that, nor has there ever been one that even came close, although illegal incursions have risen and fallen over the years.

But, fair refugee and asylum programs that actually interpreted the applicable domestic and international laws correctly (instead of the “any reason to deny, no matter how wrong attitude” still widespread and tolerated at both Mayorkas’s DHS and Garland’s DOJ) and generously granted protection as was the intention behind the UN Refugee Convention in the first place would certainly encourage large segments of those now forced to irregularly cross the border instead to apply abroad or at legal ports of entry.

It would also facilitate the USG working with NGOs, the UNHCR, states, and localities to get individuals needed assistance so that their legal claims could be processed in a fair, efficient, and timely manner. The latter objectives seem to have totally eluded both Mayorkas and particularly Garland. They continue to “blow off the experts” and flounder with mindless, “designed to fail,” “deterrence-focused” gimmicks. Talk about a lose-lose!

Also to state the obvious, if CBP were less focused on apprehending individuals who pose no real threat to the U.S., but merely want a fair shot at applying for legal protection — something our laws require that Trump annihilated, the Federal Courts have flubbed, and Biden has done a substandard job of re-instituting — they would have time to focus more resources on drug and human smugglers.

Instead, in perhaps one of the dumbest and most wasteful juxtapositions in recent American history, the CBP focus is on “apprehending” (a term I use lightly, since many individuals “want” to be “found,” so they can get access to the system otherwise improperly denied to them by CBP) those merely seeking to comply with the law! To do that, CBP ignores or misses many of those who actually pose threats. At the same time, both DHS and DOJ use methods, attitudes, and legal interpretations that themselves undermine fundamental fairness, the rule of law, and humanity itself.

Immigrants are America’s past, present, and future! Indeed, climate change, rising oceans, drought, starvation, transportation improvements, globalized commerce, wars, religious bigotry, pandemics, and other factors beyond the control of any one government will continue to drive worldwide migration.

Building walls, prisons, hate, resentment, and constructing bogus “invasion myths” will not change the reality of human migration and the necessity to adopt to and harness it in a smart, humane, realistic manner. Doing the opposite, will only diminish us as a nation and inhibit our own chances for future prosperity. But, in the end, it won’t stop human migration.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

09-04-22

DAN RATHER & ELLIOT KIRSHNER: TRUMP’S VERSI0N OF A “WEST WING NUDIST CAMP” — CHECK YOUR DECENCY @ THE DOOR, ENTERING AN “ETHICS FREE ZONE!” — “The naked self-interest was so rampant that Trump’s West Wing could be considered a nudist colony where decency was shed instead of clothing.” 🏴‍☠️

Clothing/Ethics Optional in MAGALAND — Ethics Prohibited Beyond This Point! “The naked self-interest was so rampant that Trump’s West Wing could be considered a nudist colony where decency was shed instead of clothing.” CREATIVE COMMONS.

They Knew. They All Knew.

Cowardice, Cynicism, Contempt, Rationalizations

Dan Rather and Elliot Kirschner

6 hr ago

1,403

476

Documents seized from Donald Trump’s Florida home (credit: Department of Justice)

Sometimes we write a lot of words on Steady. Today will be an exception. Because for all that there is to say, for all that needs to be said, for all that an accounting for history requires we say, the general sentiments are quite simple:

They knew. They all knew.

It was clear to anyone who had an ounce of appreciation for what the job of the presidency entails, to anyone who respected the constitutional order of our government, to anyone who worried about the health and safety of this nation, to anyone with a moral compass, to anyone who prizes the common sense of purpose that great leaders can summon, that Donald J. Trump had no business anywhere near the presidency.

Now, as he melts down in the face of a serious criminal investigation, as we see pictures of how he stored classified material and his utter disregard for our nation’s most sensitive secrets, as we are left to wonder what he was up to and what damage was done, we should recognize that we would not be where we are today without his enablers, apologists, and hangers-on.

They heralded his outrageousness in a chorus of sycophancy.
They feted his vileness.
They viciously attacked those who pointed out the obvious, that Trump was mentally, emotionally, intellectually, morally, and constitutionally unfit for his office.

And who are they? They are the Republican politicians, the so-called serious ones who expressed their concerns in private even as they used Trump to achieve their desired tax cuts and judges. They are the members of his administration — senior and junior — who jockeyed to maximize their career benefit at the expense of doing the necessary work for the American people. They are the lawyers who twisted themselves into pretzels to try to legalize his inherent lawlessness. They are the media personalities who saw Trump as a printing press for their accrual of wealth and power. They are the capitalists who put corporate earnings ahead of the well-being of the nation.

While Trump’s voters were primed with a toxic stew of hatred, bigotry, and divisiveness, the small cabal playing the inside game didn’t bother with the MAGA hats. They were too busy trading access for favors. The naked self-interest was so rampant that Trump’s West Wing could be considered a nudist colony where decency was shed instead of clothing.

But make no mistake…

In their cowardice, they knew.
In their cynicism, they knew.
In their contempt, they knew.
In their rationalizations, they knew.
In their acquittals of his conduct, even for impeachment, they knew.

They knew when they could have stopped him — before he became president, and once he was president.

But they didn’t stop him. And with their inaction, they encouraged him.

As the Trump bubble begins to pop, all these people who knew what he was all along will likely scurry like cockroaches when the lights go on. They will make all sorts of excuses for their complicity. They will gaslight, lie, and try to rewrite history. You can already see it in many of their so-called tell-all books. Except what they are telling is only the story they want people to hear. It is not the truth.

The truth is that they don’t dare say what we all know. They knew.

Note: If you are not already a subscriber to our Steady newsletter, please consider doing so. And we always appreciate you sharing our content with others and leaving your thoughts in the comments.

***********************
Throughout history, despots and would-be despots have surrounded themselves with motley crews of sycophants, toadies, and retainers. Trump has excelled at it!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

09-01-22

⚖️🗽 US JUDGE IN SAN DIEGO EVISCERATES TRUMP’S ILLEGAL AND IMMORAL “TURNBACKS” OF ASYLUM APPLICANTS; MAYORKAS TERMINATES REMAIN IN MEXICO (AGAIN) EVEN AS RED RESTRICTIONIST AGs FILE MORE FRIVOLOUS OBJECTIONS! 🤮

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12R1mt07Z4S7R7xiieRUznueR9DRXrBdq/view?usp=sharing

Al Otro Lado v. Mayorkas

U.S. District Judge Cynthia Bashant minces no words in blasting both the unlawful, cruel, and unconstitutional policy and the Supreme’s toxic decision to look the other way as immigration enforcement runs roughshod over legal, constitutional, and human rights.

In its September 2, 2021 decision, this Court held the right to access the U.S. asylum

process conferred vis a vis § 1158(a)(1) applies extraterritorially to noncitizens who are

arriving at Class A POEs along the U.S.-Mexico border, but who are not yet within the

jurisdiction of the United States, and is of a constitutional dimension. (Op. Granting in

Part and Denying in Part Parties’ Cross-Mots. for Summ. J. (“MSJ Opinion”), ECF No.

742.) It further held that Defendants’ systematic turnbacks of asylum seekers arriving at

Class A POEs (the “Turnback Policy”) amounted to an unlawful withholding by

immigration officials of their mandatory ministerial “inspection and referral duties”

detailed in 8 U.S.C. § 1225 (“§ 1225”), in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act,

5 U.S.C. § 706(1) et seq., and the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause. (MSJ Opinion at

33–34, 37–38); see 8 U.S.C. §§ 1225(a)(3) (mapping out immigration officials’ duty to

inspect asylum seekers), 1225(b)(1)(A)(ii) (mapping out immigration officials’ duty to

refer asylum seekers to the U.S-asylum process).

In casting appropriate equitable relief to rectify the irreparable injury Defendants’

unauthorized and constitutionally violative Turnback Policy has inflicted upon members

of the Plaintiff class,2 this Court ordinarily would be guided by the fundamental principle

that an equitable remedy should be commensurate with the violations it is designed to

vindicate. See Columbus Bd. of Educ. v. Penick, 443 U.S. 449, 465 (1979) (“[It is an]

accepted rule that the remedy imposed by a court of equity should be commensurate with

the violation ascertained.”). Equitable relief should leave no stone unturned: it should

correct entirely the violations it is aimed at vindicating. That cornerstone of Article III

courts’ equitable powers generally is unfaltering, whether the party against whom an

injunction is sought is a private entity, a state actor, or, as here, a federal official. Thus, in

2 Plaintiffs consist of the named Plaintiffs listed in the case caption, along with a certified class

consisting of “all noncitizens who seek or will seek to access the U.S. asylum process by presenting

themselves at a Class A [POE] on the U.S.-Mexico border, and were or will be denied access to the U.S.

asylum process by or at the instruction of [Customs and Border Protection] officials on or after January 1,

2016.” (Class Certification Order at 18, ECF No. 513.) The Court also certified a subclass consisting of

“all noncitizens who were or will be denied access to the U.S. asylum process at a Class A POE on the

U.S.-Mexico border as a result of Defendants’ metering policy on or after January 1, 2016.” (Id.)

– 3 – 17cv2366

the ordinary course of things, this Court would not hesitate to issue broad, programmatic

relief enjoining Defendants from now, or in the future, turning back asylum seekers in the

process of arriving at Class A POEs, absent a valid statutory basis for doing so.

Yet the circumstances with which this Court is presented are not ordinary because

of the extraordinary, intervening decision of the United States Supreme Court in Garland

v. Aleman Gonzalez, 142 S. Ct. 2057 (2022). That decision takes a sledgehammer to the

premise that immigration enforcement agencies are bound to implement their mandatory

ministerial duties prescribed by Congress, including their obligation to inspect and refer

arriving noncitizens for asylum, and that, when immigration enforcement agencies deviate

from those duties, lower courts have authority to issue equitable relief to enjoin the

resulting violations. It does so through unprecedented expansion of a provision of the

Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1989 (“IIRIRA”), 8

U.S.C. § 1252(f)(1) et seq. (“§ 1252(f)(1)”), which for years the Ninth Circuit has

interpreted as placing a relatively narrow limit on injunctive relief. In essence, Aleman

Gonzalez holds that § 1252(f)(1) prohibits lower courts from issuing class-wide injunctions

that “require officials to take actions that (in the Government’s view) are not required” by

certain removal statutes, including § 1225, or “to refrain from actions that (again in the

Government’s view) are allowed” by those same provisions. Id., 142 S. Ct. at 2065.

Federal courts (except for the Supreme Court) now may only issue injunctions enjoining

federal officials’ unauthorized implementation of the removal statutes in the individual

cases of noncitizens against whom removal proceedings have been initiated. See id.

In no uncertain terms, the logical extension of Aleman Gonzalez appears to bestow

immigration enforcement agencies carte blanche to implement immigration enforcement

policies that clearly are unauthorized by the statutes under which they operate because the

Government need only claim authority to implement to immunize itself from the federal

judiciary’s oversight.

With acknowledgment that its decision will further contribute to the human suffering

of asylum seekers enduring squalid and dangerous conditions in Mexican border

– 4 – 17cv2366

communities as they await entry to POEs, this Court finds the shadow of Aleman Gonzalez

inescapable in this case. Even the most narrow, meaningful equitable relief would have

the effect of interfering with the “operation” of § 1225, as that term is construed by the

Aleman Gonzalez Court, and, thus, would clash with § 1252(f)(1)’s remedy bar. Aleman

Gonzalez not only renders uneconomical vindication of Plaintiff class members’

statutorily- and constitutionally-protected right to apply for asylum, those inefficiencies

inevitably will lead to innumerable instances in which Plaintiff class members will be

unable to vindicate their rights at all. Thus, while the majority and dissent in Aleman

Gonzalez hash out their textual disagreements concerning § 1252(f)(1)’s scope in terms of

remedies, make no mistake, Aleman Gonzalez leaves largely unrestrained immigration

enforcement agencies to rapaciously scale back rights. See Tracy A. Thomas, Ubi Jus, Ibi

Remedium: The Fundamental Right to a Remedy Under Due Process, 41 San Diego L.

Rev. 1633, 1634 (2004) (“Disputes over remedies provide a convenient way for dissenters

to resist conformance to legal guarantees. Courts can declare rights, but then default in the

remedy to avoid a politically unpopular result.” (footnote omitted)).

Although it is no substitute for a permanent injunction, class-wide declaratory relief

is both available and warranted here. In lieu of even a circumscribed injunction enjoining

Defendants from again implementing a policy under which they turn back asylum seekers

presenting themselves at POEs along the U.S.-Mexico border, the Court enters a

declaration in accordance with its MSJ Opinion that turning back asylum seekers

constitutes both an unlawful withholding of Defendants’ mandatory ministerial inspection

and referral duties under § 1158 and § 1225 in violation of both the APA and the Fifth

Amendment Due Process Clause. The Court also issues relief as necessary to named

Plaintiff Beatrice Doe.

. . . .

You can read Judge Bashant’s full opinion at the link.

Meanwhile, Secretary Mayorkas exercised the authority recognized by the Supremes in Biden v. Texas to terminate the reprehensible and illegal “Remain in Mexico” (a/k/a “Let ‘Em Die in Mexico”) program engineered by Trump and Miller. Predictably, the same scofflaw, restrictionist “Red AG’s” who had instituted frivolous litigation to block this long overdue action filed more specious objections with the Trump-appointed US District Judge, as advocacy groups like Justice Action Center (“JAC”) pledged to fight the racist right until this vile (and highly ineffective) program is finally ended.

JAC Responds to Official Termination of Remain in Mexico, Attempts by Texas to Delay Wind-Down

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

August 9, 2022

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a victory for immigrants’ rights movement, the Remain in Mexico program has been officially terminated after court proceedings following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Biden v. Texas on June 30. Below is a statement from Justice Action Center founder and director Karen Tumlin:

“The official end to shameful Remain in Mexico program is a victory for the immigrants’ rights movement and the right to asylum. RMX is a stain on the country’s history, having harmed tens of thousands of people fleeing for their lives since the Trump Administration instituted the unlawful and immoral program in 2019.

“Since the Supreme Court’s ruling affirming the authority of the Biden Administration to end the RMX program, the #SafeNotStranded campaign has called on the President and DHS to implement a swift and humane wind-down, including halting all new enrollments and allowing everyone in RMX to safely pursue their asylum claims in the U.S. Yesterday, DHS stated its wind-down has begun and new people will not be enrolled in the program, and that it would disenroll individuals with upcoming RMX hearings. These are important first steps to finally redress just some of the immense harm inflicted by the program.

“This commitment by DHS, following such a significant SCOTUS victory, illustrates the strength and resilience of the immigrants’ rights movement. But even after a clear loss, Texas is continuing its hateful attempts to keep this deadly program in place for as long as possible: After the District Court rightfully vacated its injunction of the RMX wind-down yesterday, Texas unfortunately—yet unsurprisingly—filed an amended complaint challenging the second DHS memo rescinding RMX, as well as a motion asking the District Court to stay the memo’s effective date.

“But we will not be deterred: advocates will continue to fight back against ongoing red state efforts to continue Trump’s racist and xenophobic agenda and work towards a world where all people fleeing danger can be safe, not stranded.”

# # #

Contact: Tasha Moro; 323-450-7269; tasha.moro@justiceactioncenter.org

Justice Action Center (JAC) is a new nonprofit organization dedicated to fighting for greater justice for immigrant communities by combining litigation and storytelling. JAC is committed to bringing additional litigation resources to address unmet needs, empower clients, and change the corrosive narrative around immigrants in the U.S. Learn more at justiceactioncenter.org and follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

Related:

8/1/22: JAC Responds to Supreme Court’s Certification of Decision on Remain in Mexico; Encourages Swift and Humane Wind-Down of Deadly Program

6/30/22: Justice Action Center Welcomes Positive Supreme Court Decision on Remain in Mexico in Biden v. Texas

3/21/22: #SafeNotStranded Campaign Launches Ahead of April Supreme Court Arguments in Biden v. Texas

*******************************

We should remember that the Trumpest GOP’s insurrectionist war on American democracy and attack on truth and human decency began with overt lies and racist attacks on migrants of color and non-Christians. It has escalated to become an all out assault on our future as a nation of laws and values.

We can’t go back to a time when liberals and progressives viewed immigration as a tangental or secondary issue. It is THE all-encompassing issue now in preserving American democracy from GOP efforts to destabilize and destroy our nation’s fabric from bottom to top!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-11-22

THE GIBSON REPORT — 08-08-22 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Managing Attorney, NIJC — Among Headliners: “The [Trump Administration’s child separation] policy’s worst outcomes were all anticipated, and repeated internal and external warnings were ignored,” Reports Caitlin Dickerson in The Atlantic!

Weekly Briefing

This briefing is designed as a quick-reference aggregation of developments in immigration law, practice, and policy that you can scan for anything you missed over the last week. The contents of the news, links, and events do not necessarily reflect the position of the National Immigrant Justice Center. If you have items that you would like considered for inclusion, please email them to egibson@heartlandalliance.org.

CONTENTS (jump to section)

◦NEWS

◦LITIGATION & AGENCY UPDATES

◦RESOURCES

◦EVENTS

PRACTICE UPDATES

Chief Immigration Judge Email: Taking Cases Off Calendar: Cases may be selected to be taken off the court’s calendar for the following reason(s)…

EOIR Schedule: EOIR immigration judges are scheduled for a mandatory training session on Aug. 22, 2022, from 1pm to 5pm EST. The Chicago Immigration Court will re-set all non-detained cases scheduled for that afternoon; detained cases will go forward. It is unclear at this time if/how this affects other courts.

NEWS

Thune breaks through Democratic bloc on ‘vote-a-rama’ amendments

Roll Call: Senate Democrats stuck together and mostly voted against amendments to their tax, climate and health care package, while using a procedural maneuver to allow their vulnerable incumbents to vote for some that could score political points without actually making any changes to the bill [including on immigration].

The secret history of the U.S. government’s family-separation policy

The Atlantic: Over the past year and a half, [the Atlantic] has conducted more than 150 interviews and reviewed thousands of pages of internal government documents, some of which were turned over only after a multiyear lawsuit… The policy’s worst outcomes were all anticipated, and repeated internal and external warnings were ignored.

Talk of ‘invasion’ moves from the fringe to the mainstream of GOP immigration message

NPR: In Republican primary races this year, few issues have come up more in TV ads than immigration. And one word in particular stands out: invasion.

New York City works to make space for rapidly rising number of asylum-seekers

NPR: On Monday, New York Mayor Eric Adams announced a round of emergency contracts with local agencies and organizations to allow the city to respond to an increasing number of asylum-seekers entering the city’s homeless shelter system. See also Pentagon denies DC request for National Guard migrant help.

Border Patrol Agents Are Trashing Sikh Asylum-Seekers’ Turbans

Intercept: “The turban is sacred.” At least 64 Sikh men have had their headwear confiscated and discarded by Yuma’s Border Patrol.

Immigrant Rights Advocates Push Cook County To Find Out If ICE Is Using Data Brokers To Skirt Sanctuary City Ordinances

Block Club: Cook County Commissioner Alma Anaya and several immigrant rights organizations held a public hearing last week in which the county’s Legislation and Intergovernmental Relations Committee heard testimony from experts about how U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement uses data from companies like LexisNexis.

The Officer of the Future: Facial Recognition and the Border-Industrial Complex

Border Chron: Facial recognition has become the primary biometric technology for CBP. Everyone who enters the country has their picture taken, though supposedly people can opt out (that often isn’t obvious, thanks to a lack of signage; I cross the border constantly and have never seen anything about opting out). The surveillance technology has also been deployed at 32 airports for people exiting the country. CBP partners with airports and airlines to add another layer to this private-public nexus.

Fact Check: Immigrants are not getting Social Security numbers at the U.S. border

AP: Lara Logan, a former Fox Nation host, recently claimed that U.S. Border Patrol agents are distributing Social Security numbers to immigrants at the border. A video of her comments has circulated widely across social media platforms… No such thing is happening, Rhonda Lawson, a spokesperson for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, told the AP in an email.

NYC Attorney Carlos Moreno Imprisoned For Immigration Fraud

NYCaribNews: Between September 2017 – when Moreno was suspended from the bar – and late September 2018, Moreno took on new clients, practiced law, and gave legal advice to scores of undocumented immigrants. In some instances, even predating his suspension, Moreno defrauded clients by falsely claiming that undocumented immigrants who have resided in the United States for over a decade could secure legal status, a fraud known as the “10-Year Green Card Scam.”

DHS Watchdog Reports Understaffing At Afghan ‘Safe Havens’

Law360: The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s internal watchdog reported worker shortages at the military sites that provided a temporary refuge to Afghan evacuees, saying the understaffing left officials concerned they couldn’t properly meet Afghan nationals’ needs.

LITIGATION & AGENCY UPDATES

Supreme Court certifies ruling ending Trump border policy

AP: The two-word docket entry read “judgment issued” to record that justices voted 5-4 in a ruling issued June 30 that the administration could scrap the “Remain in Mexico” policy, overruling a lower court that forced the policy to be reinstated in December.

Matter of Fernandes, 28 I&N Dec. 605 (BIA 2022)

BIA: A respondent who has made a timely objection to a noncompliant notice to appear is not generally required to show he or she was prejudiced by missing time or place information. An Immigration Judge may allow the Department Homeland Security to remedy a noncompliant notice to appear without ordering the termination of removal proceedings [Note: Except in CA7, pursuant to Arreola-Ochoa].

3rd Circ. Upholds Deportation Of Surgeon In $3M Tax Scheme

Law360: A Swedish plastic surgeon who served prison time for a $3 million tax evasion scheme should not be allowed back into the U.S., the Third Circuit ruled Thursday.

4th Circ. Says Death Threat Is Persecution In Asylum Case

Law360: The Fourth Circuit gave a Salvadoran woman and her son a second chance at their asylum application, holding that an immigration judge didn’t give enough weight to her claim of death threats on the basis of religion.

CA9 On Cancellation, Pre-Trial Detention: Troncoso-Oviedo V. Garland

LexisNexis: Pretrial detention not credited toward a sentence is not “confinement, as a result of conviction” under § 1101(f)(7).

9th Circ. Won’t Stop Man’s Removal Based On 1997 Conviction

Law360: The Ninth Circuit rejected a Mexico native’s bid to reopen his removal proceedings on grounds that his 1997 conviction was modified, saying none of the circumstances allowing the challenge of a removal applied to him.

Immigration Enforcement Can’t Block Grants, 9th Circ. Rules

Law360: The Ninth Circuit ruled that federal funds for criminal justice programs can’t be withheld from states and counties that don’t enforce immigration laws, upholding lower court decisions that found the denial an overreach of the U.S. Department of Justice’s authority.

11th Circ. OKs Deportation Of Chilean Convicted Of ‘Whatever’

Law360: The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Tuesday a deportation order against a Chilean green card holder who pled guilty to violating a Florida law criminalizing child neglect, while acknowledging that the trial court’s record of the conviction was “hopelessly opaque” and included the state judge specifying the criminal offense was for “whatever.”

Travel Ban Waiver Lawsuit Victory: Emami V. Mayorkas

LexisNexis: Drawing all inferences and viewing all evidence in the light most favorable to the government, the Court finds that plaintiffs have met their burden of showing that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact, and that the waiver implementation guidance was arbitrary and capricious in violation of the APA.

NY Judge Declines Relief For DACA Hopefuls In ‘Limbo’

Law360: A New York federal judge refused to modify an order resuming acceptance of new Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals applications, saying clarification sought following a Texas judge’s barring new approvals was actually a request for additional relief.

Russian Denied Resident Status Over Cannabis-Related Work

Law360: A California federal judge has affirmed a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services decision to deny a Russian national permanent resident status, ruling that by installing and maintaining a security camera system for a cannabis grower, the person had participated in the trafficking of a Schedule I drug.

Pa. Judge Says USCIS Must Redo Spousal Petition After Delay

Law360: A Pennsylvania judge ordered U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to reconsider a man’s petition for his Turkish wife’s green card, saying the agency’s unreasonable delay in denying the petition unfairly hampered the couple’s ability to address the agency’s concerns.

Biden Ordered To Revisit Visa Apps Nixed In Trump Travel Ban

Law360: A California federal judge ordered the Biden administration to revisit the tens of thousands of visa applications that were denied under Trump-era travel restrictions, finding that targeted foreigners were still bruised from the travel ban, long after its revocation.

USCIS Issuing Updated I-797C for Certain Operation Allies Welcome Parolees

USCIS: Certain EADs with a validity period of less than 2 years are now being automatically extended to align with the parole period shown on the beneficiary’s Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record.

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance on Uncharacterized Military Discharges Eligible for Naturalization

AILA: USCIS issued policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to address the eligibility of military service members with uncharacterized military discharges for purposes for naturalization under section 328 or section 329 of the INA. Comments are due by 9/2/22.

EOIR Announces 19 New Immigration Judges

EOIR: [EOIR] announced the appointment of 19 immigration judges to courts in California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

EOIR Warns of Scammers Spoofing Agency Phone Number

EOIR: The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) today announced it has recently been notified of phone calls that spoof the Arlington Immigration Court as part of a misinformation campaign. The callers will often “spoof,” or fake, the immigration court’s main line, 703-305-1300, so the calls appear to be coming from EOIR on the recipient’s caller ID.

RESOURCES

AILA: USCIS Lockbox Updates (Updated 8/3/22)

AILA: Find Resources for Assisting Afghan Clients (Updated 8/2/22)

CLINIC: All About Parole Practice Advisory

CLINIC: Age-Out Rules for Afghan SIV Derivative Children

USCIS: Afghan Operation Allies Welcome (OAW) Parolee Asylum-Related Frequently Asked Questions

EVENTS

8/10/22 Preparing Criminal Waivers of Inadmissibility

8/10/22-8/11/22 2022 AILA Paralegals Virtual Conference

8/12/22 TPS Beneficiaries and Authorized Travel Following the Rescission of Matter of Z-R-Z-C-

8/16/22 Comprehensive Overview of Immigration Law (COIL)

8/16/22 The Child Status Protection Act: Strategies for Keeping the Family Intact

8/17/22 ASISTA Inadmissibility Webinar Series: Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude (CIMT): Impact on Immigrant Survivors

8/23/22 Preparing Solid Affidavits of Support: “Show Me the Money!”

8/23/22 Comprehensive Overview of Immigration Law (COIL)

8/24/22 Seeking Prosecutorial Discretion Post Texas v. United States

8/30/22 Naturalization During the Pandemic: “It Was the Best of Times, It Was the Worst of Times”

8/31/22 What to Do When You Get a Decision from the Ninth Circuit

8/31/22 Building Your Pro Bono Program

9/1/22 For Immigration Practitioners: Understanding Referrals & Resources for Low-Income Clients

9/8/22-9/29/22 Webinar Series: Dealing With Denials

9/8/22 Post-Conviction Relief: “If I Could Turn Back Time!”

9/8/22 Trial Advocacy Skills – Working with Expert Witnesses in Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and Convention Against Torture Claims

9/13/22 PLI: Representing Children in Immigration Matters 2022: Effective Advocacy and Best Practices

9/14/22 Representing U Visa Clients with Complex Issue

9/14/22 Partial to Full Accreditation Initiative 2022

9/15/22 Advanced Mandamus Trends

9/20/22 Nonprofit and For-Profit Entity Intersection 2022: Achieving Charitable Goals Through Innovative and Nontraditional Mechanisms

9/21/22 Breaking Down the Record in a Ninth Circuit Petition for Review

9/22/22 Maximizing Second Chances: Filing Appeals, Motions, and Practicing before the BIA

9/29/22 Consular Processing Roundup for Families and Survivors

10/07/22-10/28/22 Understanding and Preparing Waivers

10/29/22 4th Annual NIJC 5k for Immigrant Justice

To sign up for additional NIJC newsletters, visit: https://immigrantjustice.org/subscribe.

You now can change your email settings or search the archives using the Google Group. If you are receiving this briefing from a third party, you can visit the Google Group and request to be added.

Elizabeth Gibson (Pronouns: she/her/ella)

Managing Attorney for Capacity Building and Mentorship

National Immigrant Justice Center

A HEARTLAND ALLIANCE Program

224 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 600, Chicago, IL 60604
T: (312) 660-1688| F: (312) 660-1688| E: egibson@heartlandalliance.org

www.immigrantjustice.org | Facebook | Twitter

***************

Interestingly, none of the “perps” of child abuse by the Trump Administration has been held accountable. By contrast, many of their victims have suffered irreparable harm.

Trump officials provided “explicitly false formation” to intentionally mislead the public about the abusive, racist intent behind their program of intentional misconduct. So, why isn’t this a problem?

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-10-22

🇺🇸🗽⚖️NDPA ACTIVISTS HELP BEAT BACK GOP NATIVIST SPOILER AMENDMENTS TO RECONCILIATION BILL — Dems Need To Win Midterms To Thwart Newest GOP Immigration Hate Plan!

Hon. Jeffrey S. Chase
Jeffrey S. Chase Blog
Coordinator & Chief Spokesperson, Round Table of Former Immigration Judges

“Sir Jeffrey” Chase reports:

Hi: I just heard that all of the anti-immigration measures that Republicans attempted to add as amendments to the reconciliation bill were defeated.

I’m so in awe of the advocates who were up all night monitoring the process and weighing in with Senators’ offices.

Best, Jeff

*******************

James “Jim” Crow
Symbol of American Racism, Now At The Heart of The GOP Immigration Agenda

But, don’t relax or breathe a sign of relief. The GOP is very up front about the Jim Crow hate agenda they plan to roll out if they gain control of Congress in the midterms. Here is is in all it’s dishonesty, cruelty, and racist agitation:

https://republicans-homeland.house.gov/media/2022/07/Border-Rollout-one-pager_FINAL_formatted.pdf

Yes, you can expect Biden to veto any of this. But, it still will disrupt the business of Congress and will lead to hate rhetoric, lies, and racist stereotypes being hurled against immigrants and people of color. There is virtually no chance that the GOP would have the votes to override the vetoes in both Houses.

Still, upcoming generations of younger Americans will have to decide whether they want to live and raise their children in the the “American Hungary” — a neo-Nazi state where racial and ethic hatred and anti-Semitism will be at the center of all authoritarian Government policy. If not, the younger generation of the NDPA needs to come up with ways of keeping the GOP out of political power from the top to the bottom.

However welcome, the latest hard-fought victory over racist nativism and xenophobia was just the beginning of the struggle for the heart and soul of America.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-08-22

☠️⚰️🏴‍☠️ TITLE 42 CAUSES DEATH @ THE BORDER: Rachel Monroe @ The New Yorker Sums Up The Jim Crow Cruelty, Stupidity, & Futility Of Title 42 In One Paragraph! — Title 42 “has increased business for smuggling cartels and spurred people to cross in more dangerous places.”

https://apple.news/AX5E8qIWlQYOauANHEV2g3w

. . . .

Between 2015 and 2020, about fifty bodies were recovered each year in Brooks County, according to an S.T.H.R.C. report. Then came Title 42, a policy enacted by the Trump Administration at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic that closed ports of entry and blocked most avenues for asylum claims, ostensibly for public-health reasons. The policy, which is still in place in a modified form, has increased business for smuggling cartels and spurred people to cross in more dangerous places. “Before Title 42, the calls we got used to be, like, eighty-per-cent apprehended, twenty-per-cent missing,” Canales said. “Now it’s flipped—it’s more like twenty-per-cent apprehended, eighty-per-cent missing.” So far this year, there have been nearly seventy recoveries of remains in Brooks County, putting 2022 on track to be the deadliest year on record.

. . . .

*****************

Read Rachel’s entire report, directly from the border, at the link.

So, before the Trump Administration’s bogus, racist “invocation” of Title 42, 80% of migrants came to the border or were easily apprehended close thereto — most probably because they turned themselves in to seek asylum through the legal system. And, lets not forget, this was with an already badly broken, fundamentally unfair, asylum legal adjudication system intentionally biased and “loaded” against legitimate refugees seeking protection!

Smart, honest public policy would have improved asylum adjudication at USCIS and at EOIR to quickly recognize and grant, with the assistance of NGOs and legal assistance groups, the many cases of legitimate refugees so that they could take their rightful, legal places in our society.

Additionally, by taking refugees seeking legal determinations “out of the equation,” enforcement against those seeking to evade legal processing — certainly a much, much smaller “universe” than is “out there now” — would have been enhanced. Business would have declined for smugglers, as those seeking protection would have been motivated to use a humane, fair, functioning legal system rather than being forced into “do it yourself” refuge!

You don’t have a genius to figure this out — just not be motivated solely by racism like Stephen Miller and his Trump regime cronies! Better qualified — non-Jim Crow righty — Federal Judges would also produce more humane, honest, and rational results.

Additionally, by running a legitimate asylum system, and complementing it with an honest, robust, legal refugee system for Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa, we would finally have sound data on how many of those seeking to enter at the Southern Border are entitled to immigrate as legal refugees and how many are non-refugees. That’s something on which we now have no reliable information — just myths and anecdotes, many provided by racist restrictionists and nativists with neither expertise in asylum law nor any real interest in the rule of law at the border.

As a result of Title 42, and the unqualified “Jim Crow” Federal Judges, GOP nativist AGs, and their apologists (including some in the media who repeat or republish, without critical examination, GOP racist lies about the border), we now have a deadlier than ever border; the legal immigration system at the border has been functionally abolished and replaced with an underground, extralegal system; the U.S. Government has ceded control of border migration policy to cartels and smugglers; and the job of the Border Patrol — forced to spend time apprehending legal refugees who seek only the protection to which they are legally entitled — has become impossible.

That’s what happens when we let GOP nativist pols, overt racists, and bad, right wing Federal Judges take over the immigration policies that were actually enacted by Congress — a key part of which are legitimate refugee and asylum systems and a fair, functioning, expert Immigration Court. Right now, we have NONE of the foregoing. And, innocent migrants at the border are too often paying the price — with their lives!

Border Death — This is a monument for those who have died attempting to cross the US-Mexican border. Each coffin represents a year and the number of dead. It is a protest against the effects of Operation Guardian. Taken at the Tijuana-San Diego border.
Tomas Castelazo
To comply with the use and licensing terms of this image, the following text must must be included with the image when published in any medium, failure to do so constitutes a violation of the licensing terms and copyright infringement: © Tomas Castelazo, www.tomascastelazo.com / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY-SA 3.0

“Enforcing the law” does NOT mean unfairly, unwisely, and illegally abrogating the legal asylum system and fair adjudications in Immigration Court at the border. It means fixing the legal asylum system including USCIS Asylum Offices. Perhaps most of all, it means reforming and replacing where necessary the broken, dysfunctional, leaderless, and non-expert Immigration Courts and a BIA that continues to misinterpret asylum and protection laws on a daily basis. We need a BIA of real judges with the expertise and guts to establish fair, humane, correct, positive precedents and to rein in or remove from asylum cases those Immigration Judges who are “programmed to reject, not protect!”

I, along with many others, watched the Brittney Griner travesty unfold. I saw the irony. President Biden was rightfully blasting the outrageous “kangaroo court” show trial that passes for justice in Russia. But, at the same time, he, Harris, and Garland are basically running a farcical “Russian style” dysfunctional immigrant “justice” system at EOIR and calling it a “court!”

Kangaroos — Perhaps, in addition to blasting the Griner farce, President Biden, VP Harris, and AG Garland need to take a closer look at the “Russian-style” justice being inflicted on migrants in their wholly-owned Immigration “Courts” — which particularly target women, children, and migrants of color seeking justice under US laws. Indeed, many are still being arbitrarily returned without ANY process at all! Others get “off the wall” denials of their valid claims. Its this REALLY any way for a self-proclaimed “nation of laws” to operate?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rasputin243/
Creative Commons License

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever

PWS

08-05-22

☹️🤯CBP BLUNDERS BURDEN COURTS, INDIVIDUALS! — DHS Fails On “Ministerial Act” Of Filing NTA In 1 Of 6 Cases, Causing Massive Dismissals!

TRAC reports:

https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/691/

DHS Fails to File Paperwork Leading to Large Numbers of Dismissals

Published Jul 29, 2022

One out of every six new cases DHS initiates in Immigration Court are now being dismissed because CBP officials are not filing the actual “Notice to Appear” (NTA) with the Court. The latest case-by-case Court records obtained and analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University through a series of Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests show a dramatic increase in these cases. See Figure 1. The number of case closures along with those dismissed because no NTA was filed are shown in Table 1.

Figure 1. Immigration Court Cases Dismissed Because DHS Failed to File a “Notice to Appear” to Initiate Court Proceedings, FY 2013 – FY 2022 (through June)

Table 1. Immigration Court Cases Dismissed Because DHS Failed to File a “Notice to Appear” to Initiate Court Proceedings, FY 2013 – FY 2022 (through June)

Fiscal Year All Court Completions Dismissed: No NTA Filed

Number Percent

2013 167,446 355 0.2%

2014 160,483 225 0.1%

2015 168,684 41 0.0%

2016 178,052 11 0.0%

2017 179,153 84 0.0%

2018 193,391 505 0.3%

2019 276,647 4,686 1.7%

2020 243,367 5,952 2.4%

2021 144,751 15,244 10.5%

2022* 284,446 47,330 16.6%

* Through the first 9 months (Oct-June 2022). If pattern continues, FY 2022 would end with 63,107 projected dismissals.

Ten years ago this failure to file a NTA was rare. But as the onset in Table 1 shows, the frequency increased once Border Patrol agents were given the ability to use the Immigration Court’s Interactive Scheduling System (ISS). Using ISS, the agents can directly schedule the initial hearing (i.e. a master calendar hearing) at the Immigration Court. Supposedly, the actual NTA is created at the same time, and a copy given to the asylum seeker or other noncitizen with the scheduled hearing location and time they are to show up in Court noted on the NTA.

Thus, the process only requires that CBP actually follow up with the ministerial task of seeing that the Court also receives a copy of the NTA. With the implementation of the Court’s ECAS system of e-filing, this should have made the process quick and straightforward. That this is failing to be done suggests there is a serious disconnect between the CBP agents entering new cases and scheduling hearings through the Court’s ISS system, and other CBP personnel responsible for submitting a copy to the Court.

This is exceedingly wasteful of the Court’s time. It is also problematic for the immigrant (and possibly their attorney) if they show up at hearings only to have the case dismissed by the Immigration Judge because the case hasn’t actually been filed with the Court.

Where Is This Problem Occurring?

TRAC has sought, but has yet been unable to obtain, information on the specific Border Patrol units and locations where failure to file these NTAs is occurring. However, an analysis of all Court hearing locations finds that there are some Courts where the majority of all case completions are these dismissals for failing to file the NTA.

Leading the list in terms of the number of these NTA closures is the Dedicated Docket hearing location in Miami. Fully 7,700 out of the total of 9,492 case completions during FY 2022 — or 81 percent — were dismissals because the Court had not received the NTA.

While the situation for the Dedicated Docket in Miami was extreme, a number of Dedicated Docket locations have much higher dismissal rates than occur nationally where 1 out of 6 (17%) of case completions are closed for this reason. In Boston’s Dedicated Docket the rate of dismissal during the first 9 months of FY 2022 has been 62 percent, and in New York’s and Los Angeles’ Dedicated Dockets the rate is 32 percent – almost twice the national average.

But other Dedicated Docket locations have below average dismissal rates. These include San Francisco with 11 percent, New York’s separate Broadway DD hearing location with 15 percent, and Newark with 16 percent. [1] While It would appear that a policy which tries to accelerate the scheduling and hearing of cases puts additional pressure on DHS to promptly file, it isn’t an insurmountable burden. [2]

Further, some regular hearing locations have also been experiencing high dismissal rates because of DHS’s failure to file NTAs. These include Houston with 54 percent, Miami with 43 percent, and Chicago with 26 percent.

For a list of Immigration Court hearing locations with their individual dismissal rates because of DHS’s failure to file the NTA see Table 2.

Table 2. Immigration Court Cases by Hearing Location Dismissed Because DHS Failed to File a “Notice to Appear” to Initiate Court Proceedings in FY 2022 (October 2021-June 2022)

Court Hearing Location All Court Completions Dismissed: No NTA Filed Rank: No NTA

Number Percent Number Percent

All 284,446 47,330 17%

IAD designated Hearing Locations* 5,516 5,516 100% 3 1

Miami – Dedicated Docket – DD 9,492 7,700 81% 1 2

Boston – Dedicated Docket – DD 2,752 1,698 62% 6 3

Houston, Texas 7,518 4,064 54% 4 4

Miami, Florida 16,644 7,155 43% 2 5

El Paso – Dedicated Docket – DD 169 69 41% 48 6

Los Angeles – Dedicated Docket – DD 3,006 974 32% 10 7

New York – Dedicated Docket – DD 3,436 1,098 32% 8 8

Chicago, Illinois 5,006 1,292 26% 7 9

Denver – Dedicated Docket – DD 1,019 258 25% 32 10

Orlando, Florida 3,437 640 19% 19 11

Charlotte 6,057 979 16% 9 12

New York Varick 4,254 676 16% 17 13

Newark – Dedicated Docket – DD 1,854 290 16% 29 14

Atlanta Non-Detained Juvenile 421 65 15% 49 15

NYB – Dedicated Docket – DD 1,183 179 15% 33 16

MPP Brownsville Gateway International Bridge 848 126 15% 37 17

Houston – S. Gessner 6,179 914 15% 11 18

Leland Federal Building 3,241 477 15% 23 19

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 5,284 748 14% 14 20

Santa Ana Immigration Court 6,257 874 14% 12 21

Chicago Non-Detained Juveniles 101 14 14% 65 22

New York City, New York 21,202 2,784 13% 5 23

Boston, Massachusetts 5,793 748 13% 14 24

New Orleans, Louisiana 5,139 647 13% 18 25

Arlington, Virginia 6,546 821 13% 13 26

Phoenix, Arizona 3,869 480 12% 22 27

San Juan, Puerto Rico 406 49 12% 52 28

Denver, Colorado 4,547 506 11% 20 29

San Francisco – Dedicated Docket – DD 1,437 159 11% 35 30

New York Broadway 6,593 708 11% 16 31

Sacramento Immigration Court 1,285 131 10% 36 32

Kansas City, Missouri 1,145 115 10% 41 33

Omaha, Nebraska 1,419 125 9% 38 34

San Diego, California 3,539 289 8% 30 35

Atlanta, Georgia 3,596 285 8% 31 36

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 220 17 8% 61 37

San Diego – Dedicated Docket – DD 288 22 8% 60 38

El Paso, Texas 2,208 168 8% 34 39

Las Vegas, Nevada 1,622 119 7% 40 40

Detroit, Michigan 1,953 124 6% 39 41

Van Nuys Immigration Court 6,405 388 6% 24 42

Houston Greenspoint Park 5,738 338 6% 26 43

Buffalo, New York 1,439 82 6% 43 44

Cleveland, Ohio 5,557 316 6% 27 45

Laredo Immigration Court 443 25 6% 58 46

San Francisco, California 9,277 502 5% 21 47

Mia Non-Detained Juveniles 536 29 5% 53 48

Newark, New Jersey 6,568 345 5% 25 49

San Francisco Non-Detained Juveniles 226 11 5% 68 50

Honolulu, Hawaii 278 13 5% 66 51

MPP Court El Paso 604 27 4% 55 52

Seattle – Dedicated Docket – DD 588 26 4% 56 53

Harlingen, Texas 1,811 78 4% 46 54

Portland, Oregon 1,281 54 4% 51 55

MPP Laredo,texas – Port of Entry 143 6 4% 72 56

Salt Lake City, Utah 1,949 80 4% 44 57

Tucson, Arizona 791 29 4% 53 58

MPP Court San Ysidro Port 195 7 4% 71 59

Charlotte Juvenile 477 17 4% 61 60

Reno, Nevada 330 11 3% 68 61

Memphis, Tennessee 3,837 114 3% 42 62

Hartford Juvenile 144 4 3% 73 63

Los Angeles – North Los Angeles Street 3,253 78 2% 46 64

Los Angeles, California 12,702 304 2% 28 65

Hartford, Connecticut 2,596 60 2% 50 66

Bloomington 3,577 79 2% 45 67

Imperial, California 497 9 2% 70 68

Bloomington Juvenile 177 3 2% 77 69

Arlington Juvenile 950 16 2% 64 70

Boston Unaccompanied Juvenile 817 13 2% 66 71

Detroit – Dedicated Docket – DD 200 3 2% 77 72

Memphis Juvenile 288 4 1% 73 73

Philadelphia Juvenile 375 4 1% 73 74

San Antonio, Texas 3,015 26 1% 56 75

Florence, Arizona 270 2 1% 79 76

Dallas, Texas 3,667 23 1% 59 77

New Orleans Juvenile 166 1 1% 81 78

Seattle, Washington 3,170 17 1% 61 79

Baltimore, Maryland 2,772 4 0% 73 80

Hyattsville Immigration Court 1,939 2 0% 79 81

Louisville, Kentucky 1,110 1 0% 81 82

Pearsall, Texas – Detention Facility 1,505 0 0% none none

Winn Correctional Facility 1,342 0 0% none none

Port Isabel Service Processing Center 1,324 0 0% none none

San Francisco Annex 1,017 0 0% none none

Stewart Detention Center – Lumpkin Georgia – LGD 866 0 0% none none

Conroe Immigration Court 754 0 0% none none

Baltimore, Maryland Juvenile 737 0 0% none none

Aurora Immigration Court 676 0 0% none none

San Antonio Satellite Office 654 0 0% none none

Boise, Idaho 575 0 0% none none

Moshannon Valley Correctional Facility 574 0 0% none none

Stewart Immigration Court 569 0 0% none none

T. Don Hutto Residential 527 0 0% none none

Jackson Parish 496 0 0% none none

Krome North Service Processing Center 474 0 0% none none

Prairieland Detention Center 470 0 0% none none

Imperial Detained 462 0 0% none none

Atlanta Non-Detained 417 0 0% none none

Otay Mesa Detention Center 407 0 0% none none

Chicago Detained 406 0 0% none none

Laredo, Texas – Detention Facility 404 0 0% none none

Lasalle Detention Facility 390 0 0% none none

Northwest Detention Center 382 0 0% none none

Eloy INS Detention Center 381 0 0% none none

Polk County Detention Facility 377 0 0% none none

El Paso Service Processing Center 372 0 0% none none

Otero County Processing Center 350 0 0% none none

Southwest Key 348 0 0% none none

Bluebonnet Detention Center 344 0 0% none none

Cleveland Juvenile 340 0 0% none none

Rio Grande Detention Center 319 0 0% none none

Denver Family Unit 282 0 0% none none

DHS-Litigation Unit/Oakdale 259 0 0% none none

Caroline Detention Facility 248 0 0% none none

Immigration Court 247 0 0% none none

Denver – Juvenile 245 0 0% none none

Houston Service Processing Center 240 0 0% none none

La Palma Eloy 237 0 0% none none

Batavia Service Processing Center 228 0 0% none none

Karnes County Correction Center 224 0 0% none none

Mcfarland-Mcm For Males 224 0 0% none none

River Correctional Facility 221 0 0% none none

Dilley – Stfrc 217 0 0% none none

Boston Detained 215 0 0% none none

Broward Transitional Center 202 0 0% none none

San Antonio Non-Detained Juvenile 182 0 0% none none

La Palma 179 0 0% none none

Seattle Non-Detained Juveniles 177 0 0% none none

Louisville Juvenile 175 0 0% none none

Orange County Correctional Facility 173 0 0% none none

Cibola County Correctional Center 161 0 0% none none

South Louisiana Correctional Center 161 0 0% none none

Richwood Correctional Center 158 0 0% none none

Nye County 150 0 0% none none

Kansas City Immigration Court – Detained 148 0 0% none none

San Diego Non-Detained Juvenile 142 0 0% none none

Bloomington Detained 137 0 0% none none

Desert View 131 0 0% none none

Giles W. Dalby Correctional Institution 122 0 0% none none

Joe Corley Detention Facility 116 0 0% none none

Texas DOC- Huntsville 112 0 0% none none

Torrance County Detention Facility 109 0 0% none none

Calhoun County Jail 107 0 0% none none

* Note all closures are for the failure to file a NTA. The Court created these special “IAD locational codes” ultimately within 77 Courts beginning back in July 2018. The cases they handle appear to consistently close because no NTA was filed. In FY 2022 these “IAD” dismissals were recorded as spread across 31 different Immigration Courts (“base cities”). Thus, this “IAD” tag appears to function largely as a book-keeping measure to separate out these dismissals from the rest of the Court’s proceedings at these diverse locations.

Footnotes

[1]^ Three other Dedicated Docket locations which have a relatively small number of closures to date also weren’t experiencing high dismissal rates. These included Detroit where only 3 out of its 200 closures (2%) were because the NTA hadn’t been filed; Seattle with just 26 cases dismissed out of its 588 closures (4%); and San Diego with 22 dismissals out of its 288 closures (8%).

[2]^ See TRAC’s January 2022 report noting significant dismissal rates for failure to file at Dedicated Docket hearing locations. The rate then was 10 percent so the problem has considerably worsened since then.

TRAC is a nonpartisan, nonprofit data research center affiliated with the Newhouse School of Public Communications and the Whitman School of Management, both at Syracuse University. For more information, to subscribe, or to donate, contact trac@syr.edu or call 315-443-3563.

*******************

It’s not rocket science! 🚀

Compare the reality of easily fixable systemic Government failures with gimmicks and harsh sanctions meant to dishonestly shift blame and consequences to individual victims.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-31-22

JULIA TOEPFER @ NIJC: “Guaranteed To Fail” Immigration Deterrence Policies Certain To Bring Death, Disorder, Human Suffering — Why Can’t We “Get Smarter” As A Nation?

Since the 1990s, U.S. immigration policy has centered the goal of decreasing or “deterring” migration. These policies are designed with one goal in mind – punishing people for the act of migration with such cruelty that the harsh measures themselves will deter future migration.

Not only does this strategy not work, but it has deadly human consequences.

The devastating toll of deterrence programs came into full view with the recent tragedy in San Antonio, Texas, where 53 migrants died in the back of a tractor-trailer after attempting to enter the United States. Human rights experts, including NIJC, responded by emphasizing the urgent need to shift away from programs that block lawful pathways to entry or push people toward dangerous terrain.

Quote from Lisa Koop, National Director of Legal Services, National Immigrant Justice Center:

Nonetheless, the U.S. government continues to double-down on policies and programs aimed at deterring migration. Some recent examples include continuing the Trump-era Remain in Mexico and Title 42 programs, and increasing the use of criminal prosecutions to punish migrants alleged to enter the country without authorization. Here are updates on each of these programs since we last reached out to you about them, along with ways you can demand that the U.S. government restores access to asylum and stops punishing people for migrating:

➡️ Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration could end the Remain in Mexico program, and it’s now time for the administration to follow through. Also known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), this program has forced more than 75,000 people to wait in dangerous conditions in Mexico while their claims are pending in U.S. immigration courts. This program defaced basic principles of due process and decades of U.S. commitment to protect people from harm and persecution. NIJC continues to represent dozens of asylum seekers who were subject to the program, including some who are still waiting in Mexico. Sign the petition calling on President Biden to end Remain in Mexico.

➡️ Border Patrol just released new data showing there have been 2,132,711 expulsions of people seeking safety at the U.S. border under Title 42, the vast majority of which happened under the Biden administration. The Trump administration implemented Title 42 under the guise of protecting public health during COVID-19, but the real goal was always to block Black, Brown, and Indigenous people from migrating to the United States. There have been nearly 10,000 documented cases of kidnappings, rape, torture, or other acts of violence against people who were expelled under Title 42. Yet, right now, some members of Congress are trying to pass legislation that continues this policy indefinitely. Tell your members of Congress to end Title 42 and oppose all efforts to continue it indefinitely.

Bar chart showing the number of expulsions at the border each month under the Trump and Biden administrations between March 2020 and June 2022. During the Trump administration the lines are red and during the Biden administration the lines are blue. The blue lines are longer and there are more of them, indicating many more people have been expelled under this policy during the Biden administration than the Trump administration.

➡️ The Biden administration is ramping up the use of criminal prosecutions to punish migrants arriving at the U.S. border, despite decades of evidence showing these prosecutions don’t work to deter migration and cause widespread harm. The increased use of such prosecutions flies in the face of the administration’s commitments to racial equity and to a more humane approach to migration policy. Criminal prosecutions do not stop people from crossing the border, but instead have caused widespread harm, separated countless families, and undermined asylum rights. Check out NIJC’s latest blog post explaining five ways that immigration prosecutions are deadly and ineffective.

NIJC knows, from years of representing immigrants and asylum seekers, that punitive border policies do not deter people from fleeing violence or seeking to reunite with their families.

Above all, immigration policies focused on deterrence inevitably and tragically cause countless deaths and untold human suffering. The U.S. must abandon a deterrence strategy, reopen ports of entry for asylum screenings, and embrace a humanitarian approach to immigration – it’s the only way to end systemic injustices, reduce mass incarceration, and protect fundamental human rights.

Thanks for joining us to get there.

-Julia Toepfer
National Immigrant Justice Center

***********************************

“Maximum deterrence programs” have little empirical support. Human migration, a phenomenon as old as humanity, is largely driven by powerful forces beyond whether a rich country has built walls, prisons, unfair legal systems, and other artificial barriers to “deter” migration. At best (or worst, depending on how one looks at it) these “gimmicks” and the predictable accompanying “rhetoric of hate, dehumanization, and rejection” nibble around the edges of migration patterns.

But, they are deeply rooted in the racial history of the U.S., and play a major role in the White Nationalist mythology that surrounds deterrence.

A smart nation might harness, take advantage of, and direct the flow of human migration. Ultimately, failed deterrence gimmicks will inflict cruelty and cause the death of some migrants. They also diminish the reputation and diminish the humanity of the “destination nation.”

But, they won’t stop folks from leaving intolerable situations to seek a better life elsewhere — no matter what the odds, risks, or hardships. And, they eat up money and resources that could actually be directed into building more realistic legal migration systems that would benefit both the migrants and the receiving countries.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PW@S
07-29-22

MICA ROSENBERG @ REUTERS: “NEW Reuters project on the rising numbers of deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border” — Death Is Just “Collateral Damage” From Bad Border & Immigration Policies! — As The Desert Gets Hotter, Expect The Human Toll To Rise! ☠️⚰️

Hi there again,

I also wanted to share a multi media project we published yesterday about the rising number of deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-immigration-border-deaths/

Through our reporting, we exclusively learned that U.S. Customs and Border Protection quietly changed last year how they count deaths on the border to only include deaths in custody, during arrests or when agents were nearby and there were 151 such “CBP-related” deaths in the 2021 fiscal year.

We are still reporting on this and other issues of course, so please keep in touch with tips and story ideas!

All the best,

Mica

………………………………………………….

Mica Rosenberg

Reuters News

National Immigration Reporter

www.reuters.com

****************************

Thanks, Mica. “Tune in” to the full “multimedia report” referenced by Mica at the above link to Reuters.

No amount of statistical hocus-pocus or nativist BS can hide the stain of these deadly, yet ultimately ineffective, border enforcement policies. It’s important that the names and actions of the politicos, bureaucrats, and bad judges who promote and encourage deadly violations of human rights, and their media apologists, be preserved and documented for history!

As we can see, there are, and will continue to be, concerted efforts to “cover up,” deny, and misrepresent the deadly effects of bad border policies! “Dehumanization of the other,” actively promoted by Trumpists and other White Nationalist GOP pols and their hand picked Federal Judges is a crucial first step!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-27-22

☠️ MORE THAN 40 MIGRANTS DEAD IN TEXAS TRAGEDY!

Arelis Hernandez and Nick Miroff report for WashPost:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/06/27/migrants-dead-texas/

SAN ANTONIO — At least 40 migrants were found dead in the back of a tractor-trailer in San Antonio Monday, according to two federal law enforcement officials briefed on the horrific finding.

Rescuers pulled at least 15 others from the vehicle and they were taken for medical treatment, said one of the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to provide preliminary information.

The truck was found by agents from Homeland Security Investigations, a branch of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that specializes in human trafficking cases, one of the officials said. HSI agents are leading the investigation.

. . . .

*************************

Developing story. Read the complete version at the above link.

PWS

06-27-22

⚖️👩🏽‍⚖️JUDGING IN AMERICA: Will Appellate Judges On The 6th Cir. (Including a Bush II Appointee) Get Right What Trumpy Judge Drew Tipton Screwed Up? — Early Signs For Better Result On Mayorkas Memo Could Provide “Cautious Optimism” For Sending GOP States’ Frivolous Claims Packing!

https://www.courthousenews.com/biden-administration-defends-immigration-policy-before-sixth-circuit/

Biden administration defends immigration policy before Sixth Circuit

The federal government argued in defense of a policy instituted by President Biden that prioritizes the deportation of individuals deemed national security threats.

KEVIN KOENINGER / June 10, 2022/Courthouse News

CINCINNATI (CN) — Federal courts cannot impose nationwide injunctions to counteract guidance handed down by the Department of Homeland Security regarding enforcement of federal immigration law, President Joe Biden’s administration argued Friday before an appeals court.

Prioritized deportation of illegal immigrants who “pose the greatest threats to national security, public safety, and border security” is within the scope of DHS’s authority and does not run counter to established immigration law, according to the administration, which was sued by several states after the guidance was implemented in September 2021.

Ohio, Arizona and Montana challenged the “balancing test” adopted as part the guidance, claiming the discretionary nature of the analysis of an immigrant’s mental health and criminal history exceeds the statutory authority granted to DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.

U.S. District Judge Michael Newman, a Donald Trump appointee, sided with the states and granted their motion for a preliminary injunction in March 2022, finding federal law “left no flexibility” when it comes to detainment of illegal immigrants during the removal process.

“The permanent guidance allows noncitizens to be released on removal-period and post-removal bond based on factors Congress did not intend DHS to consider and in contrast to DHS’s own regulations,” he said.

Shortly thereafter, a Sixth Circuit panel stayed the injunction pending the outcome of Biden’s appeal.

In its brief to the Cincinnati-based appeals court, the federal government criticized the outlandish nature of the lawsuit and cited Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton when he argued courts have no authority to adjudicate federal immigration policy.

“For most of our nation’s history, a lawsuit like this one would have been unheard of: states did not sue the federal government based on the indirect, downstream effects of federal policies,” the brief states. “And district judges did not purport to enter nationwide injunctions, which ‘take the judicial power beyond its traditionally understood uses,’ ‘incentivize forum shopping,’ and ‘short-circuit’ the judicial process by forcing appellate courts to resolve complex disputes on short notice and without the benefit of percolation or full briefing.”

The Biden administration argued the states lack standing to sue and said Newman’s decision would set a precedent to “allow the federal courts to be drawn into all manner of generalized grievances at the behest of states seeking to secure by court order what they were unable to obtain through the political process.”

. . .

Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton, a George W. Bush appointee, asked about the harm caused to the federal government if the appeals court allowed the injunction to remain in place.

“It certainly leads to confusion,” Tenny answered. “It leads to officers not being able to conduct their operations in a normal course.”

The attorney emphasized the guidance does not run counter to immigration law and requires officers to zero in on dangerous criminals because of the focus on individuals deemed threats to national security.

“It makes you start to think guidance just isn’t reviewable,” Sutton quipped.

Tenny agreed that most guidance is not. He said “there are circumstances … with guidance that requires people to do something where it could be reviewed,” but pointed out such a scenario is “worlds apart from here.”

. . . .

Sutton pushed back against the idea of states challenging the federal government in this fashion, and said in the past, “most people would have laughed at the idea … of states coming in to challenge the guidance.”

“Let’s say you’re right,” the judge said. “I’m still trying to figure out what a victory looks like for you.”

“All that we want,” Flowers answered, “is what the district court did.”

Sutton expressed skepticism of immigration enforcement statistics cited by the states’ attorney and said he was “so dubious about relying on these numbers” because of the Covid-19 pandemic and other factors.

Flowers countered with evidence that ICE officials have gone on the record and claimed the drop in enforcement is based solely on compliance with the guidance.

“Their key theory,” Sutton said, “is that elections matter. That resonates to me when it’s very unclear what the courts could do [in this situation].”

In his rebuttal, Tenny argued no administration has ever fully enforced federal immigration law because there simply aren’t enough resources.

He also disputed the statistics cited by his opposing counsel.

“There is so much going on in the world here,” Tenny said. “To say changes in numbers is because of the guidance is extraordinary.”

U.S. Circuit Judges R. Guy Cole Jr. and Karen Moore, both Bill Clinton appointees, also sat on the panel.

Sutton said the court hopes to adhere to the three-month timeframe established at the outset of the appeal, which would set release of the panel’s opinion for early July.

***********************

Read the complete report at the link.

Way too early for a “Due Process Victory Dance” 💃🏻 here. Oral argument is not always an accurate predictor of results.

But, preliminary indications were that the 6th Cir. panel might have seen through the “disingenuous smokescreen” being thrown up by GOP Nativist State AGs and Trumpster U.S. District Judge Michael Newman. The latter was overeager to inject himself into the legitimate efforts by Mayorkas to return some rationality, order, and fiscal prudence to ICE Enforcement that was reeling and discredited by the biases and uncontrolled excesses of the Trump era.

And, thankfully, Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton also was skeptical about statistics cited by the States derived from DHS Enforcement. For example, so-called “apprehension statistics” from DHS are often distorted — in part because, as the result of the Title 42 travesty, CBP apprehended some of the same individuals over and over again without any formal determinations.

Indeed, many of those “apprehended” merely sought a legal determination of their right to asylum — something that both the Trump and Biden Administration have stubbornly and illegally denied to them.

Folks who wrongfully are denied a chance to make a legal application for protection at the border and seek to turn themselves in to get some sort of review of their situation in a timely matter are not legitimate “apprehensions” nor do they pose any threat. Indeed, the threat to America here comes from lawless actions by DHS at the Southern Border, attempts by GOP-controlled States to substitute myths and nativism for legitimate policies, and overly permissive Federal Courts who have failed to put a stop to either of the foregoing abuses — indeed sometimes participating in and furthering the mocking of the rule of law and fundamental fairness!

The statements made by Bush II appointee Chief Judge Sutton are actually in line with “traditional conservative judging” that consistently treated Executive exercises of prosecutorial discretion in immigration as beyond the scope of judicial review. In my days in INS General Counsel, we were extremely effective in defending the “hands off PD” position before Federal Judges of all philosophies.

That’s why the Garland DOJ’s failure to “wipe up the floor” with these baseless suits from out of line GOP AGs seeking to turn Federal litigation into a nativist political sideshow is so shocking to those of us who recognize how the system should, and has in the past, worked.

If the 6th Circuit does uphold the “Mayorkas Memo,” we might well be heading for a Circuit conflict. I doubt that the 5th Circuit will exercise meaningful review over Judge Tipton’s power grab in Texas.

That could well leave it up to the Supremes — some time from now.

In the meantime, the ICE Enforcement system probably will continue to reel from the unwarranted interference inflicted by Trump Judges like Tipton, Newman, and some of their righty colleagues.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

06-13-22

JULIA EDWARDS AINSLEY @ NBC NEWS REPORTS ON ADMINISTRATION’S “SECRET” PLAN TO RELOCATE ASYLUM SEEKERS!

Here’s Julia’s video report from NBC Nightly News:

https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/biden-administration-plans-to-bus-migrants-to-shelters-deeper-in-the-u-s-141815877904

*******************

OBSERVATION: The Biden Administration has been in office for 17 months. During that time the could have established a realistic, robust refugee program, working with UNHCR and NGOs, to screen and process those waiting in Mexico.

Those who qualified would be admitted in legal status, with permanent work authorization, on their way to green cards and eventual citizenship. No CBP, no Asylum Office Backlogs, no backlogged Immigration Courts, no arbitrary, capricious, wildly inconsistent decisions from EOIR and the 5th Circuit, no expensive and inhumane detention, no ankle bracelets. Those legally admitted would also be eligible immediately for refugee resettlement assistance! America is something like 11 million workers “short” — the answer is staring us in the face! See, e.g., https://www.newsweek.com/us-hits-cap-temporary-work-visas-employers-seek-11-million-workers-1713948

Instead, we get secrecy, fumbling, bumbling, and more “
”gimmicks” guaranteed to stir up litigation and controversy without solving problems, facing reality, and harnessing the great power of human migration.

Also, why on earth would the Administration relocate migrants to Texas — a move guaranteed to generate more racist posturing and pushback from Abbott? Why not work with states, localities, NGOs, religious, and legal aid groups in many localities prepared to welcome immigrants and where their skills could be used in the job market?

It’s also worth noting that the so-called “record numbers” at the border often count the same person over and over — a phenomenon aggravated by arbitrary use of Title 42 to return many individuals without proper legal screening.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

06-09-22

🏴‍☠️👎🏽 IDEOLOGICALLY SPLIT SUPREMES USE “NATIONAL SECURITY FICTION” TO FREE BORDER PATROL AGENTS FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS! — EGBERT v. BOULE

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-147_g31h.pdf

Syllabus by Court staff:

EGBERT v. BOULE

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR

THE NINTH CIRCUIT

No. 21–147. Argued March 2, 2022—Decided June 8, 2022

Respondent Robert Boule owns a bed-and-breakfast—the Smuggler’s Inn—in Blaine, Washington. The inn abuts the international border between Canada and the United States. Boule at times helped federal agents identify and apprehend persons engaged in unlawful cross-bor- der activity on or near his property. But Boule also would provide transportation and lodging to illegal border crossers. Often, Boule would agree to help illegal border crossers enter or exit the United States, only to later call federal agents to report the unlawful activity.

In 2014, Boule informed petitioner Erik Egbert, a U. S. Border Pa- trol agent, that a Turkish national, arriving in Seattle by way of New York, had scheduled transportation to Smuggler’s Inn. When Agent Egbert observed one of Boule’s vehicles returning to the inn, he sus- pected that the Turkish national was a passenger and followed the ve- hicle to the inn. On Boule’s account, Boule asked Egbert to leave, but Egbert refused, became violent, and threw Boule first against the ve- hicle and then to the ground. Egbert then checked the immigration paperwork for Boule’s guest and left after finding everything in order. The Turkish guest unlawfully entered Canada later that evening.

Boule filed a grievance with Agent Egbert’s supervisors and an ad- ministrative claim with Border Patrol pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). Egbert allegedly retaliated against Boule by re- porting Boule’s “SMUGLER” license plate to the Washington Depart- ment of Licensing for referencing illegal activity, and by contacting the Internal Revenue Service and prompting an audit of Boule’s tax re- turns. Boule’s FTCA claim was ultimately denied, and Border Patrol took no action against Egbert for his use of force or alleged acts of re- taliation. Boule then sued Egbert in Federal District Court, alleging a Fourth Amendment violation for excessive use of force and a First Amendment violation for unlawful retaliation. Invoking Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U. S. 388, Boule asked the Dis- trict Court to recognize a damages action for each alleged constitu- tional violation. The District Court declined to extend Bivens as re- quested, but the Court of Appeals reversed.

Held: Bivens does not extend to create causes of action for Boule’s Fourth Amendment excessive-force claim and First Amendment retaliation claim. Pp. 5–17.

(a) In Bivens, the Court held that it had authority to create a dam- ages action against federal agents for violating the plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights. Over the next decade, the Court also fashioned new causes of action under the Fifth Amendment, see Davis v. Pass- man, 442 U. S. 228, and the Eighth Amendment, see Carlson v. Green, 446 U. S. 14. Since then, however, the Court has come “to appreciate more fully the tension between” judicially created causes of action and “the Constitution’s separation of legislative and judicial power,” Her- nández v. Mesa, 589 U. S. ___, ___, and has declined 11 times to imply a similar cause of action for other alleged constitutional violations, see, e.g., Chappell v. Wallace, 462 U. S. 296; Bush v. Lucas, 462 U. S. 367. Rather than dispense with Bivens, the Court now emphasizes that rec- ognizing a Bivens cause of action is “a disfavored judicial activity.” Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U. S. ___, ___.

The analysis of a proposed Bivens claim proceeds in two steps: A court asks first whether the case presents “a new Bivens context”—i.e., is it “meaningfully different from the three cases in which the Court has implied a damages action,” Ziglar, 582 U. S., at ___, and, second, even if so, do “special factors” indicate that the Judiciary is at least arguably less equipped than Congress to “weigh the costs and benefits of allowing a damages action to proceed.” Id., at ___. This two-step inquiry often resolves to a single question: whether there is any reason to think that Congress might be better equipped to create a damages remedy. Further, under the Court’s precedents, a court may not fash- ion a Bivens remedy if Congress already has provided, or has author- ized the Executive to provide, “an alternative remedial structure.” Ziglar, 582 U. S., at ___. Pp. 5–8.

(b) The Court of Appeals conceded that Boule’s Fourth Amendment claim presented a new Bivens context, but its conclusion that there was no reason to hesitate before recognizing a cause of action against Agent Egbert was incorrect for two independent reasons. Pp. 9–13.

(1) First, the “risk of undermining border security provides reason to hesitate before extending Bivens into this field.” Hernández, 589 U. S., at ___. In Hernández, the Court declined to create a damages remedy for an excessive-force claim against a Border Patrol agent be- cause “regulating the conduct of agents at the border unquestionably has national security implications.” Id., at ___. That reasoning applies with full force here. The Court of Appeals disagreed because it viewed Boule’s Fourth Amendment claim as akin to a “conventional” exces- sive-force claim, as in Bivens, and less like the cross-border shooting in Hernández. But that does not bear on the relevant point: Permitting suit against a Border Patrol agent presents national security concerns that foreclose Bivens relief. Further, the Court of Appeals’ analysis betrays the pitfalls of applying the special-factors analysis at too gran- ular a level. A court should not inquire whether Bivens relief is appro- priate in light of the balance of circumstances in the “particular case.” United States v. Stanley, 483 U. S. 669, 683. Rather, it should ask “[m]ore broadly” whether there is any reason to think that “judicial intrusion” into a given field might be “harmful” or “inappropriate,” id., at 681. The proper inquiry here is whether a court is competent to authorize a damages action not just against Agent Egbert, but against Border Patrol agents generally. The answer is no. Pp. 9–12.

(2) Second, Congress has provided alternative remedies for ag- grieved parties in Boule’s position that independently foreclose a Bivens action here. By regulation, Border Patrol must investigate “[a]lleged violations” and accept grievances from “[a]ny persons.” 8 CFR §§287.10(a)–(b). Boule claims that this regulatory grievance pro- cedure was inadequate, but this Court has never held that a Bivens alternative must afford rights such as judicial review of an adverse determination. Bivens “is concerned solely with deterring the uncon- stitutional acts of individual officers.” Correctional Services Corp. v. Malesko, 534 U. S. 61, 71. And, regardless, the question whether a given remedy is adequate is a legislative determination. As in Her- nández, this Court has no warrant to doubt that the consideration of Boule’s grievance secured adequate deterrence and afforded Boule an alternative remedy. See 589 U. S., at ___. Pp. 12–13.

(c) There is no Bivens cause of action for Boule’s First Amendment retaliation claim. That claim presents a new Bivens context, and there are many reasons to think that Congress is better suited to authorize a damages remedy. Extending Bivens to alleged First Amendment vi- olations would pose an acute “risk that fear of personal monetary lia- bility and harassing litigation will unduly inhibit officials in the dis- charge of their duties.” Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U. S. 635, 638. In light of these costs, “Congress is in a better position to decide whether or not the public interest would be served” by imposing a damages ac- tion. Bush, 462 U. S., at 389. The Court of Appeals’ reasons for ex- tending Bivens in this context—that retaliation claims are “well-estab- lished” and that Boule alleges that Agent Egbert “was not carrying out official duties” when the retaliation occurred—lack merit. Also lacking merit is Boule’s claim that this Court identified a Bivens cause of ac- tion under allegedly similar circumstances in Passman. Even assum- ing factual parallels, Passman carries little weight because it predates the Court’s current approach to implied causes of action. A plaintiff cannot justify a Bivens extension based on “parallel circumstances” with Bivens, Passman, or Carlson—the three cases in which the Court has implied a damages action—unless the plaintiff also satisfies the prevailing “analytic framework” prescribed by the last four decades of intervening case law. Ziglar, 582 U. S., at ___–___. Pp. 13–16.

998 F. 3d 370, reversed.

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and ALITO, KAVANAUGH, and BARRETT, JJ., joined. GORSUCH, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed an opinion con- curring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, in which BREYER and KAGAN, JJ., joined.

KEY QUOTE FROM JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR’S CONCURRENCE DISSENT (joined by Justices Breyer and Kagan):

This Court’s precedents recognize that suits for damages play a critical role in deterring unconstitutional conduct by federal law enforcement officers and in ensuring that those whose constitutional rights have been violated receive meaningful redress. The Court’s decision today ignores our repeated recognition of the importance of Bivens actions, particularly in the Fourth Amendment search-and-seizure context, and closes the door to Bivens suits by many who will suffer serious constitutional violations at the hands of federal agents. I respectfully dissent from the Court’s treat- ment of Boule’s Fourth Amendment claim.

****************************

Thus, the Border Patrol is free to egregiously violate Constitutional rights of citizens and other “persons” in the U.S. without meaningful accountability. But, I suppose it’s what one might expect from a right-majority Court that generally views rights of corporations and guns as fundamental while treating most individual rights of persons in the U.S. as expendable.

As for Justice Thomas’s ludicrous suggestion that filing a complaint with the CBP hierarchy is a “remedy” for wrongdoing? That’s in the “sick joke” category as anyone who has actually tried to file such a complaint would know. See, e.g., https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/aclu-asks-dhs-take-action-complaints-abuse-misconduct-u-s-n1259657. Clearly, Thomas and his colleagues live in a privileged “parallel universe” where they have never had to rely on the DHS’s internal bureaucracy for redress of Constitutional violations!

As cogently pointed out by Justice Sotomayor, the majority’s intentional misuse and mischaracterization of the “national security fiction” to immunize government conduct from meaningful review in a case that actually has little or nothing to do with national security or foreign relations should also be of grave concern to all of us. Right-wing judges’ propensity to use “fictions” and “pretexts” to mask their real intent and to arrive at preconceived results is a major exercise in intellectual dishonesty!

It also reinforces my observation that it is wrong to keep appointing Justices who lack personal experience with representing individuals within our broken, dysfunctional, and often lawless immigration bureaucracy, which currently includes the U.S. Immigration “Courts” at EOIR. In many professions and occupations, the “future movers and shakers” are required to “start at the retail level” — like the rest of us — so that they understand their “customers'” needs, wants, expectations, problems, and concerns. Why do we exempt our most powerful judges from this “basic training” in delivering justice to human beings at the “retail level” of our justice system?

While many folks are too blind to see it, the lack of informed judicial oversight of the Constitutional performance of DHS, DOJ, DHS, DOS, DOL and the rest of the often underperforming USG immigration bureaucracy undermines the Constitutional rights of everyone in America, including citizens!

Life-tenured Federal Judges might act as if they are “immunized” and “above the fray” (also, to a disturbing extent, above the law and our Constitution, particularly where migrants are concerned). Meanwhile, it’s “the people’s rights” that are on the chopping block with an unprincipled “out of touch” far-right judiciary too often wielding the ax!

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

06-09-22

🏴‍☠️SCOFFLAW NATION! — TRUMP US JUDGE, GOP NATIVIST AGs CONTINUE TO DUMP ON ASYLUM SEEKERS, ☠️ HANDING HUMAN SMUGGLERS A HUGE VICTORY!🤮

Andrea Castillo reports for the LA Times:

http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=80d73090-8dd0-48a7-a802-afbc852fc2f8

. . . .

A family in Tijuana who wanted to request asylum and advocacy groups including Innovation Law Lab sought to intervene in the lawsuit. They argued that a court order keeping Title 42 in place should only apply to states involved with the suit. Summerhays denied their request.

Alicia Duran Raymundo, her partner and their 6-year-old daughter fled El Salvador after gang members threatened to torture and kill them. She said in a news release from her lawyers last week that they wanted to live with extended family in California while pursuing asylum, but instead joined the thousands of migrants living in Mexican border towns while they wait for the U.S. to reopen its doors.

“We’ve tried many times to ask for asylum but they just tell us the border is closed,” Duran said.

Seeking asylum is a legal right guaranteed under federal and international law, regardless of how someone arrived on U.S. soil. Some of those turned away are fleeing persecution, while others pushed out by turmoil in their home countries seek jobs and security.

Though migrants can’t seek asylum under Title 42, they can still be screened under the United Nations Convention Against Torture. But those screenings are more difficult to pass.

Lee Gelernt
Deputy Director
ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Program
PHOTO: ACLU

Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s immigrant rights project, noted that regardless of Friday’s decision, a prior ruling in Washington, D.C., District Court taking effect Monday prevents Title 42 from applying to families who face persecution or torture if they are expelled. Gelernt is lead attorney in that case.

“Hypocritically, the states that brought this lawsuit seemingly care about COVID restrictions only when they involve asylum seekers,” he said. “The lawsuit is a naked attempt to misuse a public health law to end protections for those fleeing danger.”

. . . .

Migrants have been removed from the U.S. nearly 2 million times since Title 42 was first used in March 2020, in some cases to dangerous situations in which they’ve been tortured or raped.

. . . .

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick
Policy Counsel
American Immigration Council
Photo: Twitter

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior policy counsel at the American Immigration Council, predicted that Title 42 is likely to stay in place until at least next year.

Summerhays’ decision signals that while the Biden administration can establish a policy under emergency conditions, terminating it requires a rulemaking comment period that could take six months to a year.

Louisiana and the other states are not arguing that the policy can never end, Reichlin-Melnick said, but they’re imposing judicial roadblocks to delay it. The CDC is likely to try to end the policy again while satisfying the judge’s demands, he said.

In the meantime, he said, “we’re going to see an ever higher number of repeat crossings. Look at the border and tell me Title 42 works.”

**********************

The case is Louisiana v. CDC, WD LA, 05-20–22. Here’s a link to the opinion:

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/LouisianaetalvCentersforDiseaseControlPreventionetalDocketNo622cv/7?1653080541

Read Andrea’s full report at the above link!

Of course Title 42 doesn’t work! But, it’s never been about a “working” border asylum policy. NO, it’s always been about cruelty fueled by nativist racism!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

05-21-22

🤮GOP NATIVISTS SAY STARVE ☠️ KIDS TO SOLVE FORMULA SHORTAGE! — “Pro-Life” Seems To End @ Birth!

GOP nativists say starving Brown-skinned kids will solve all problems.
Feed My Starving Children (“FMSC”) — El Salvador
Creative Commons License

Bess Levin @ The Levin Report:

The United States is in the midst of a massive formula crisis affecting some of the most vulnerable members of the population: babies. A perfect storm of numerous factors—pandemic-related supply chain delays; government bureaucracy; the stranglehold that just a few companies hold on the formula market; the closure of one of the biggest formula-manufacturing plants in the country, following the recall of contaminated batches and the death of two infants—has led to a terrifying reality for parents desperate and scrambling to feed their children. People who have the time—and many don’t—are driving long distances only to find empty shelves. Private sellers are reportedly price gouging, charging customers double or triple the normal amount. Unable to find what they need, some parents have been forced to ration formula as they search, often in vain, for more. One woman told The New York Times she recently found herself “freaking out, crying on the floor,” telling her husband, “Dude, I can’t feed our kids, I don’t know what to do.” The solution from Republicans, many of whom claim to be pro-life? Let the babies of undocumented parents starve. Or, at the very least, use the situation to demonize immigrants and score the cheapest of political points.

On Wednesday, Florida representative Kat Cammack tweeted a pair of photos, writing, “The first photo is from this morning at the Ursula Processing Center at the U.S. border. Shelves and pallets packed with baby formula. The second is from a shelf right here at home. Formula is scarce. This is what America last looks like.” Later, on Facebook, she claimed to have obtained the photos from a “border patrol agent” that’s been on the job for “30 years.” In the video, the congresswoman generously acknowledged that while all children deserve to eat, it’s not America’s job to feed the babies it detains.

“It is not the children’s fault at all,” Commack told her followers. “But what is infuriating to me is that this is another example of the ‘America Last’ agenda the Biden administration continues to perpetuate.” Cammack claims to be pro-life and only supports abortion in extreme cases in the first trimester, according to Fox News. She is cochair of the House Pro-Life Caucus and, naturally, is thrilled about the news that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade.

One day after Cammack’s suggestion that the migrant children the U.S. government has locked up should be forced to go hungry, Texas governor Greg Abbott jumped on the bandwagon, issuing a joint statement with the National Border Patrol Council: “While mothers and fathers stare at empty grocery store shelves in a panic, the Biden administration is happy to provide baby formula to illegal immigrants coming across our southern border…. Our children deserve a president who puts their needs and survival first—not one who gives critical supplies to illegal immigrants before the very people he took an oath to serve.” Like Cammack, Abbott would like people to believe he is “pro-life,” and signed a bill last September banning abortions after six weeks, leading to a surge of copycat legislation across the country.

Also on Thursday, Texas congressman Troy Nehls tweeted, “Baby formula should go to Americans before illegals.” (You can probably guess where Nehls stands on abortion.) And we’re sure it’ll absolutely shock you to hear that Fox News also believes migrant children should be forced to starve to death. As Media Matters’ Matt Gertz notes, a small selection of commentary from the networks’ stars over the past two days has included: “Why are we feeding illegal babies ahead of American babies?” (Jesse Watters); “These are not people that respected our borders, our laws, and our sovereignty. Why wouldn’t all of the pallets go to American families first?” (Sean Hannity); and “Once they get here, the Biden administration will give them food supplies that you can’t buy. Those would include baby formula…. How much more of this are people going to take, you wonder? It’s too humiliating” (Tucker Carlson). Fox, of course, has been a major voice in the antiabortion movement.

The rank hypocrisy of claiming to want to protect the “sanctity of life,” and then casually suggesting that some lives are less important than others aside, the entire situation these conservatives are decrying wouldn‘t actually be an issue if the right wasn’t so obsessed with imprisoning people trying to seek a better life. (While detention is not strictly the domain of Republicans— and both Joe Biden and Barack Obama were and remain happy to lock migrants up—Democrats are not the ones out there suggesting we let migrant children starve.) As the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler notes, federal law literally requires the government to provide food— as well as other basic human rights— to the people it detains. If conservatives don’t want to have to follow that rule, they should probably stop demanding the government throw migrants in prison, though we have a small, sneaking suspicion they won’t. Because demonizing people who weren‘t born here is quite clearly their thing, and has been for years. As Jezebel’s Caitlin Cruz wrote on Thursday: “Migrants and immigrants of all ages are the perfect boogeymen. First, they take their jobs; now they want to take food out of babies’ mouths, while also forcing women to carry their pregnancies to term. The hypocrisy is so thick I am choking on it.

Mitch McConnell: It’s the Supreme Court’s job to issue rulings Americans don’t want

One of the most outrageous aspects of the news that the Supreme Court is likely to overturn Roe v. Wade is the fact that—despite what some conservatives would have people believe—a majority of Americans believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases and want to see the landmark decision upheld. But according to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnnell? It’s the high court’s job to issue rulings that fundamentally change life in a way Americans don’t want.

Speaking to NPR, the Kentucky lawmaker claimed that the whole point of the Supreme Court is to make decisions that most of the country doesn’t agree with. “For the Supreme Court to on any issue, to reach a decision contrary to public opinion it is exactly what the Supreme Court is about,” he argued. “It’s to protect basic rights, even when majorities are in favor of something else, that happens all the time.” McConnell then chose to bizarrely point to the issue of flag burning, the prohibition of which the court ruled in 1989 was a violation of the First Amendment. “If you took public opinion polls on that issue, people would overwhelmingly support a legislative prohibition of flag burning, but the Supreme Court interpreted that as a violation of the First Amendment freedom of speech.”

Of course, letting people burn flags is not the same as taking away the constitutional right of millions of people to make medical decisions about their own bodies, but you’ll have to forgive ole Mitchy, who’s currently trying to make people forget he’s one of the key architects of the impending obliteration of reproductive freedoms. In the interview with NPR, he claimed that his yearslong singular focus on installing conservative judges was not specifically about gutting Roe but keeping out “judicial activist[s],” a conservative smear for judges who believe in things like, for example, women having the same bodily autonomy as men. “My interest in this was unrelated to any particular issue,” he said. Naturally, he also blamed the declining trust in the court not on the appointment of people credibly accused of sexual assault (which they deny), or the revelation that at least one of them is married to someone who tried to have the 2020 election overturned, but on the left.

“It’s no wonder that by politicizing the Supreme Court, like the political left has, including the Democratic leader of the Senate—it would affect their approval ratings. That needs to stop,” McConnell said. “The president, who knows better, set up a commission to study the composition of the court. The Supreme Court is not broken and doesn’t need fixing.” Unsurprisingly, the GOP leader refused to say what he would do if Republicans take back the Senate and Joe Biden has an opportunity to nominate another justice, though, of course, it should already be clear. “How that plays out on individual confirmations or legislation, I’m not prepared to announce today, but we are going to see where we can cooperate,” he said, unconvincingly.

Rand Paul does another solid for his pal Putin

Texas continues its war on trans kids

Per NPR:

In a unanimous ruling on a controversial issue, the Texas Supreme Court on Friday has cleared the way for the state child welfare agency to resume investigating parents and doctors who provide gender-affirming care for trans youth—actions that Governor Greg Abbott has equated to child abuse. It’s a blow to Texas families with transgender children, some of whom are departing the state or considering moves because of the threat of these investigations.

The ruling overturns a lower court’s injunction from March 11, barring state officials from pursuing Abbott’s February 22 directive that instructed the Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate “any reported instances” of a range of treatments and procedures, including the administration of hormones and puberty-blocking drugs. The parents of a transgender teen sued to stop the investigations, and in early March, District Judge Amy Clark Meachum issued a temporary order halting an investigation into the parents of the 16-year-old girl. Meachum later issued another order at the statewide level, temporarily blocking all such investigations stemming from Abbott’s directive.

In February, after Abbott issued his directive, the White House told The Dallas Morning News: “Conservative officials in Texas and other states across the country should stop inserting themselves into health care decisions that create needless tension between pediatricians and their patients. No parent should face the agony of a politician standing in the way of accessing life-saving care for their child.”

Sam Alito’s former Princeton classmate doesn’t think too highly of him

Millions of people have that in common with her. Per CNN:

Susan Squier, a former classmate of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito at Princeton University and who organized a letter protesting a leaked draft opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade, on Thursday said she was stunned and called it “a greatest hits of misogyny.”

“When I read the document—I read all 98 pages of it, and mind you, I’m trained as a scholar of literature and medicine, and I look at nuance. And when I saw that he had smuggled into the document the wording from the Mississippi Gestational Age Act, which, as I understand it—now, I’m not a lawyer—but isn’t even law yet. And he was referring to unborn children rather than fetuses. I was just stunned,” Squier told CNN’s John Berman on New Day. “I mean, I have read a lot of medical history going back for doing literature and medicine, and his is like a greatest hits of misogyny.”

“He doesn’t consider the context,” Squier continued. “And this man was a historian at Princeton. He was a double major in history and poli sci. But it is as if he doesn’t believe history actually involves a record of things changing. Instead, it is history as, ‘let’s go back to the Salem witch trials.’ It makes me so angry.”

*************************************

Get the full Levin Report here:

If you would like to receive the Levin Report in your inbox daily, click here to subscribe.

If you would like to share tonight’s newsletter, links to these stories can be found here and here. Thanks for supporting the LR!

Of course there is no causal connection between the U.S. nationwide formula shortage and providing the necessities of life to those in the DHS “New American Gulag.”

Nor are these asylum applicants illegally present in the U.S. Most were allowed in to pursue their legal right to asylum, after having been found to have a “credible fear.” Indeed, the “illegality” here is the DHS’s failure to recognize and carry out our legal and moral obligations to give all asylum seekers a fair opportunity to present their claims before impartial expert adjudicators.

Additionally, starving asylum seekers’ children would not in any way address the national shortage of formula. No, it would just be another gratuitous act of cruelty motivated by hate and racism. In other words, standard GOP policies.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

05-15-22

Fiscal Year	All Court Completions	Dismissed: No NTA Filed
Fiscal Year	All Court Completions	Number	Percent
2013	167,446	355	0.2%
2014	160,483	225	0.1%
2015	168,684	41	0.0%
2016	178,052	11	0.0%
2017	179,153	84	0.0%
2018	193,391	505	0.3%
2019	276,647	4,686	1.7%
2020	243,367	5,952	2.4%
2021	144,751	15,244	10.5%
2022*	284,446	47,330	16.6%

Court Hearing Location	All Court Completions	Dismissed: No NTA Filed		Rank: No NTA
Court Hearing Location	All Court Completions	Number	Percent	Number	Percent
All	284,446	47,330	17%
IAD designated Hearing Locations*	5,516	5,516	100%	3	1
Miami – Dedicated Docket – DD	9,492	7,700	81%	1	2
Boston – Dedicated Docket – DD	2,752	1,698	62%	6	3
Houston, Texas	7,518	4,064	54%	4	4
Miami, Florida	16,644	7,155	43%	2	5
El Paso – Dedicated Docket – DD	169	69	41%	48	6
Los Angeles – Dedicated Docket – DD	3,006	974	32%	10	7
New York – Dedicated Docket – DD	3,436	1,098	32%	8	8
Chicago, Illinois	5,006	1,292	26%	7	9
Denver – Dedicated Docket – DD	1,019	258	25%	32	10
Orlando, Florida	3,437	640	19%	19	11
Charlotte	6,057	979	16%	9	12
New York Varick	4,254	676	16%	17	13
Newark – Dedicated Docket – DD	1,854	290	16%	29	14
Atlanta Non-Detained Juvenile	421	65	15%	49	15
NYB – Dedicated Docket – DD	1,183	179	15%	33	16
MPP Brownsville Gateway International Bridge	848	126	15%	37	17
Houston – S. Gessner	6,179	914	15%	11	18
Leland Federal Building	3,241	477	15%	23	19
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania	5,284	748	14%	14	20
Santa Ana Immigration Court	6,257	874	14%	12	21
Chicago Non-Detained Juveniles	101	14	14%	65	22
New York City, New York	21,202	2,784	13%	5	23
Boston, Massachusetts	5,793	748	13%	14	24
New Orleans, Louisiana	5,139	647	13%	18	25
Arlington, Virginia	6,546	821	13%	13	26
Phoenix, Arizona	3,869	480	12%	22	27
San Juan, Puerto Rico	406	49	12%	52	28
Denver, Colorado	4,547	506	11%	20	29
San Francisco – Dedicated Docket – DD	1,437	159	11%	35	30
New York Broadway	6,593	708	11%	16	31
Sacramento Immigration Court	1,285	131	10%	36	32
Kansas City, Missouri	1,145	115	10%	41	33
Omaha, Nebraska	1,419	125	9%	38	34
San Diego, California	3,539	289	8%	30	35
Atlanta, Georgia	3,596	285	8%	31	36
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania	220	17	8%	61	37
San Diego – Dedicated Docket – DD	288	22	8%	60	38
El Paso, Texas	2,208	168	8%	34	39
Las Vegas, Nevada	1,622	119	7%	40	40
Detroit, Michigan	1,953	124	6%	39	41
Van Nuys Immigration Court	6,405	388	6%	24	42
Houston Greenspoint Park	5,738	338	6%	26	43
Buffalo, New York	1,439	82	6%	43	44
Cleveland, Ohio	5,557	316	6%	27	45
Laredo Immigration Court	443	25	6%	58	46
San Francisco, California	9,277	502	5%	21	47
Mia Non-Detained Juveniles	536	29	5%	53	48
Newark, New Jersey	6,568	345	5%	25	49
San Francisco Non-Detained Juveniles	226	11	5%	68	50
Honolulu, Hawaii	278	13	5%	66	51
MPP Court El Paso	604	27	4%	55	52
Seattle – Dedicated Docket – DD	588	26	4%	56	53
Harlingen, Texas	1,811	78	4%	46	54
Portland, Oregon	1,281	54	4%	51	55
MPP Laredo,texas – Port of Entry	143	6	4%	72	56
Salt Lake City, Utah	1,949	80	4%	44	57
Tucson, Arizona	791	29	4%	53	58
MPP Court San Ysidro Port	195	7	4%	71	59
Charlotte Juvenile	477	17	4%	61	60
Reno, Nevada	330	11	3%	68	61
Memphis, Tennessee	3,837	114	3%	42	62
Hartford Juvenile	144	4	3%	73	63
Los Angeles – North Los Angeles Street	3,253	78	2%	46	64
Los Angeles, California	12,702	304	2%	28	65
Hartford, Connecticut	2,596	60	2%	50	66
Bloomington	3,577	79	2%	45	67
Imperial, California	497	9	2%	70	68
Bloomington Juvenile	177	3	2%	77	69
Arlington Juvenile	950	16	2%	64	70
Boston Unaccompanied Juvenile	817	13	2%	66	71
Detroit – Dedicated Docket – DD	200	3	2%	77	72
Memphis Juvenile	288	4	1%	73	73
Philadelphia Juvenile	375	4	1%	73	74
San Antonio, Texas	3,015	26	1%	56	75
Florence, Arizona	270	2	1%	79	76
Dallas, Texas	3,667	23	1%	59	77
New Orleans Juvenile	166	1	1%	81	78
Seattle, Washington	3,170	17	1%	61	79
Baltimore, Maryland	2,772	4	0%	73	80
Hyattsville Immigration Court	1,939	2	0%	79	81
Louisville, Kentucky	1,110	1	0%	81	82
Pearsall, Texas – Detention Facility	1,505	0	0%	none	none
Winn Correctional Facility	1,342	0	0%	none	none
Port Isabel Service Processing Center	1,324	0	0%	none	none
San Francisco Annex	1,017	0	0%	none	none
Stewart Detention Center – Lumpkin Georgia – LGD	866	0	0%	none	none
Conroe Immigration Court	754	0	0%	none	none
Baltimore, Maryland Juvenile	737	0	0%	none	none
Aurora Immigration Court	676	0	0%	none	none
San Antonio Satellite Office	654	0	0%	none	none
Boise, Idaho	575	0	0%	none	none
Moshannon Valley Correctional Facility	574	0	0%	none	none
Stewart Immigration Court	569	0	0%	none	none
T. Don Hutto Residential	527	0	0%	none	none
Jackson Parish	496	0	0%	none	none
Krome North Service Processing Center	474	0	0%	none	none
Prairieland Detention Center	470	0	0%	none	none
Imperial Detained	462	0	0%	none	none
Atlanta Non-Detained	417	0	0%	none	none
Otay Mesa Detention Center	407	0	0%	none	none
Chicago Detained	406	0	0%	none	none
Laredo, Texas – Detention Facility	404	0	0%	none	none
Lasalle Detention Facility	390	0	0%	none	none
Northwest Detention Center	382	0	0%	none	none
Eloy INS Detention Center	381	0	0%	none	none
Polk County Detention Facility	377	0	0%	none	none
El Paso Service Processing Center	372	0	0%	none	none
Otero County Processing Center	350	0	0%	none	none
Southwest Key	348	0	0%	none	none
Bluebonnet Detention Center	344	0	0%	none	none
Cleveland Juvenile	340	0	0%	none	none
Rio Grande Detention Center	319	0	0%	none	none
Denver Family Unit	282	0	0%	none	none
DHS-Litigation Unit/Oakdale	259	0	0%	none	none
Caroline Detention Facility	248	0	0%	none	none
Immigration Court	247	0	0%	none	none
Denver – Juvenile	245	0	0%	none	none
Houston Service Processing Center	240	0	0%	none	none
La Palma Eloy	237	0	0%	none	none
Batavia Service Processing Center	228	0	0%	none	none
Karnes County Correction Center	224	0	0%	none	none
Mcfarland-Mcm For Males	224	0	0%	none	none
River Correctional Facility	221	0	0%	none	none
Dilley – Stfrc	217	0	0%	none	none
Boston Detained	215	0	0%	none	none
Broward Transitional Center	202	0	0%	none	none
San Antonio Non-Detained Juvenile	182	0	0%	none	none
La Palma	179	0	0%	none	none
Seattle Non-Detained Juveniles	177	0	0%	none	none
Louisville Juvenile	175	0	0%	none	none
Orange County Correctional Facility	173	0	0%	none	none
Cibola County Correctional Center	161	0	0%	none	none
South Louisiana Correctional Center	161	0	0%	none	none
Richwood Correctional Center	158	0	0%	none	none
Nye County	150	0	0%	none	none
Kansas City Immigration Court – Detained	148	0	0%	none	none
San Diego Non-Detained Juvenile	142	0	0%	none	none
Bloomington Detained	137	0	0%	none	none
Desert View	131	0	0%	none	none
Giles W. Dalby Correctional Institution	122	0	0%	none	none
Joe Corley Detention Facility	116	0	0%	none	none
Texas DOC- Huntsville	112	0	0%	none	none
Torrance County Detention Facility	109	0	0%	none	none
Calhoun County Jail	107	0	0%	none	none

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Al Otro Lado v. Mayorkas

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

“Sir Jeffrey” Chase reports:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever

Related posts:

TRAC reports:

DHS Fails to File Paperwork Leading to Large Numbers of Dismissals

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Arelis Hernandez and Nick Miroff report for WashPost:

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Here’s Julia’s video report from NBC Nightly News:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Syllabus by Court staff:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Andrea Castillo reports for the LA Times:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Bess Levin @ The Levin Report:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts: