Joel Rose reports for NPR:
The Trump administration has been trying to ramp up deportations of immigrants in the country illegally. But one thing has been standing in its way: Immigration judges often put these cases on hold.
Now Attorney General Jeff Sessions is considering overruling the judges.
One practice that is particularly infuriating to Sessions and other immigration hard-liners is called administrative closure. It allows judges to put deportation proceedings on hold indefinitely.
“Basically they have legalized the person who was coming to court, because they were illegally in the country,” Sessions said during a speech in December.
Sessions is using his authority over the immigration court system to review a number of judicial decisions. If he overturns those decisions, thousands of other cases could be affected. In this way, he is expected to end administrative closure, or scale it back.
The attorney general may also limit when judges can grant continuances and who qualifies for asylum in the United States.
This could reshape the nation’s immigration courts, which are overseen by the Justice Department, and make them move faster. Sessions says he is trying to clear a massive backlog of cases that is clogging the docket.
But critics say he is weighing changes that would threaten the due process rights of immigrants, and the integrity of immigration courts.
“What he wants is an immigration court system which is rapid, and leads to lots of deportations,” said Nancy Morawetz, who teaches the Immigrant Rights Clinic at New York University School of Law.
“It’s really just an unprecedented move by the attorney general to change the way the whole system works,” she said.
It’s rare for an attorney general to exercise this power, but Sessions has done it four times in the past three months.
Separately, for the first time, the Justice Department is setting quotas for immigration judges, pushing them to resolve cases quickly in order to meet performance standards.
It’s not just immigration lawyers who are worried about the effect of any changes. The union that represents immigration judges is concerned, too.
“A lot of what they are doing raises very serious concerns about the integrity of the system,” said Judge Ashley Tabaddor, president of the National Association of Immigration Judges, “judges are supposed to be free from these external pressures.”
The attorney general insists he’s trying to make sure that judges are deciding cases “fairly and efficiently.” And says he is trying to clear a backlog of nearly 700,000 cases.
That is in addition to the hundreds of thousands of cases in administrative closure. Nearly 200,000 immigration cases have been put on hold in this way in the past five years alone.
“Far and away, administrative closure was being abused,” said Cheryl David, a former immigration judge who is now a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for lower levels of immigration.
He says many of those cases should have ended in deportation. “But rather than actually going through that process, the Obama administration simply administratively closed them. And took them off the docket to be forgotten,” he said.
Sessions has chosen to personally review the case of an undocumented immigrant named Reynaldo Castro-Tum who didn’t show up for his removal hearing. The judge wondered whether the man ever got the notice to appear in court and put his deportation proceedings on hold.
In a legal filing in January, Sessions asked whether judges have the authority to order administrative closure and under what circumstances.
Immigration lawyers and judges say there are legitimate reasons to administratively close a case. For instance, some immigrants are waiting for a final decision on visa or green card applications.
There is a backlog for those applications, too. They’re granted by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which is separate from immigration court. And that can take months, if not years.
Immigration lawyers and judges are worried that undocumented immigrants could be deported in the meantime.
“You know this is not the private sector where you pay extra money and you can get it done in two days,” said Cheryl David, an immigration lawyer in New York.
David represents hundreds of undocumented immigrants who are facing deportation. She often asks judges to put the proceedings on hold.
“It gives our clients some wiggle room to try and move forward on applications,” she said. “These are human beings, they’re not files.”
Immigration lawyers say these changes could affect immigrants across the country.
Brenda DeLeon has applied for a special visa for crime victims who are undocumented. She says her boyfriend beat her up, and she went to the police.
She came to the U.S. illegally from El Salvador in 2015, fleeing gang violence, and settled in North Carolina.
“If I go back, then my life is in danger,” DeLeon said through a translator. “And not only mine, but my children’s lives too.”
For now, a judge has put DeLeon’s deportation case on hold while she waits for an answer on her visa application.
***************************************************
Get the full audio version from NPR at the above link.
Haste makes waste! Gimmicks to cut corners, deny due process, and cover up the Administration’s own incompetent and politically driven mal-administration of the Immigration Courts is likely to cause an adverse reaction by the “real courts” — the Article III Courts of Appeals — who ultimately have to “sign off” on the railroading of individuals back to potentially deadly situations.
I also have some comments on this article.
- In Castro-Tum, on appeal the BIA panel corrected the Immigration Judge’s error in administratively closing the case. Consequently, there was no valid reason for the Attorney General’s “certification” and using the case for a wide ranging inquiry into administrative closing that was almost completely divorced from the facts of Castro-Tum.
- I also question Judge Arthur’s unsupported assertion that “Far and away administrative closing was being abused.”
- According to TRAC Immigration, administrative closing of cases as an exercise of “prosecutorial discretion” by the DHS Assistant Chief Counsel accounted for a mere 6.7% of total administrative closings during the four-year period ending in FY 2015.
- In Arlington where I sat, administrative closing by the Assistant Chief Counsel was a very rigorous process that required the respondent to document good conduct, length of residence, family ties, employment, school records, payment of taxes, community involvement, and other equities and contributions to the U.S. With 10 to 11 million so-called “undocumented” individuals in the U.S., removing such individuals, who were actually contributing to their communities, would have been a complete waste of time and limited resources.
- The largest number of administrative closings in Arlington probably resulted from individuals in Immigration Court who:
- Had been granted DACA status by USCIS;
- Had been granted TPS by USCIS;
- Had approved “U” nonimmigrant visas as “victims of crime,” but were waiting for the allocation of a visa number by the USCIS;
- Had visa petitions or other applications that could ultimately have qualified them for permanent legal immigration pending adjudication by the USCIS.
- Contrary to Judge Arthur’s claim, the foregoing types of cases either had legitimate claims for relief that could only be granted by or with some action by the USCIS, or, as in the case of TPS and DACA, the individuals were not then removable. Administrative closing of such cases was not an “abuse,” but rather eminently reasonable.
- Moreover, individuals whose applications or petitions ultimately were denied by the USCIS, or who violated the terms under which the case had been closed by failing to appear for a scheduled interview or being picked up for a criminal offense were restored to the Immigration Court’s “active docket” upon motion of the DHS.
There are almost 700,000 cases now on the Immigration Courts’ docket — representing many years of work even if there were no new filings and new judges were added. Moreover, the cases are continuing to be filed in a haphazard manner with neither judgement nor restraint by an irresponsible Administration which is allowing DHS Enforcement to “go Gonzo.” To this existing mess, Sessions and Arthur propose adding hundreds of thousands of previously administratively closed cases, most of which shouldn’t have been on the docket in the first place.
So, if they had their way, we’d be up over one million cases in Immigration Court without any transparent, rational plan for adjudicating them fairly and in conformity with due process at any time in the foreseeable future. Sure sounds like fraud, waste, and abuse of the system by Sessions and DHS to me. All the more reason why we need an independent Article I U.S. Immigration Court removed from the political shenanigans and enforcement bias of Sessions and his DOJ. We need this reform sooner, rather than later!
PWS
03-30-18
Translate
