🇺🇸🗽⚖️⭐️🥇♥️🦸🏻‍♀️ PATRIOT, HERO, HUMANITARIAN, DYNAMIC LEADER, ROLE MODEL: Paula Fitzgerald, Executive Director of AYUDA, “Lt. General” of the NDPA, Will Receive Georgetown University’s Prestigious John Thompson Jr. Legacy of a Dream Award, “given to a local individual who exemplifies the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.!” — (She’s also a “Great Fiduciary!”)😎

Share

Share this on Facebook

Share this on Twitter

Share this by Email

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and Georgetown University Announce 2023 “Legacy of a Dream” Awardee

featuring

Leslie Odom, Jr.

and

THE LET FREEDOM RING CHOIR,

Nolan Williams, Jr., Music Producer

In a musical tribute to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Monday, January 16, 2023 at 6 p.m.

(WASHINGTON)—The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and Georgetown University celebrate the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with a free, ticketed musical tribute, the Let Freedom Ring Celebration. The annual program, part of the Center’s Millennium Stage free daily performance series, features Leslie Odom, Jr. and the Let Freedom Ring Choir led by Music Producer Nolan Williams, Jr., on Monday, January 16, 2023 at 6 p.m. in the Kennedy Center Concert Hall.

Georgetown University will present the annual John Thompson Jr. Legacy of a Dream Award to Paula Fitzgerald, executive director of Ayuda. Since 1973, Ayuda has served more than 150,000 low-income immigrants throughout Washington DC, Maryland and Virginia. The award is given by Georgetown University to a local individual who exemplifies the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. For more information about this year’s awardee and the Legacy of a Dream Award, please visit: https://www.georgetown.edu/mlk-initiative/

Free tickets—up to two per person—will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis at the Hall of Nations box office, beginning at 4:30 p.m. on Monday, January 16. This performance will be close-captioned and will be live streamed on the Kennedy Center Facebook and YouTube pages, and on the website at www.kennedy-center.org.

ABOUT LESLIE ODOM, JR.

Leslie Odom, Jr. is a multifaceted, award-winning vocalist, songwriter, author, and actor. With a career that spans all performance genres, he has received recognition with Tony® and Grammy Awards® as well as Emmy® and, most recently, two Academy Award® nominations for his excellence and achievements in Broadway, television, film, and music. Odom most recently starred in and performed the songs of legendary singer Sam Cooke in the critically acclaimed Amazon film adaptation of One Night in Miami…, directed by Regina King. His portrayal of the soul icon was met with widespread praise and critical acclaim, earning him nominations for an Academy Award®, BAFTA Award, Critics’ Choice Award, Golden Globe Awards®, and Screen Actors Guild Awards, among others. King also enlisted Odom to write, compose, and perform the film’s original song, “Speak Now,” for which he was nominated for an Oscar and has since earned him a Critics’ Choice Award for Best Song as well as several other award nominations.

Odom recently starred in The Many Saints of Newark, a prequel to David Chase’s Award-winning HBO series The Sopranos that was released in theaters and on HBO Max in October 2021, and he can also be heard voicing the character of ‘Owen Tillerman’ in Season 2 of the Apple TV+ animated musical-comedy series Central Park, for which he received an Emmy® nomination for Outstanding Character Voice-Over Performance in 2020. He also hosted CBS’s “The Tony Awards Present: Broadway’s Back!” special live concert event., during which he performed various musical numbers throughout the 2-hour celebration along with David Byrne, John Legend, Audra McDonald and many others. His other upcoming projects include Rian Johnson’s highly anticipated sequel, Knives Out 2; and David Gordon Green’s new Exorcist trilogy. Additional film and television credits include the Disney+ filmed musical performance of the original Broadway production of Hamilton, the limited series Love in the Time of Corona, which he executive produced and co-starred opposite Nicolette Robinson, Harriet, Murder on the Orient Express, Only, Red Tails, and Smash.

Best known for his breakout role as the original ‘Aaron Burr’ in the smash hit Broadway musical Hamilton, Odom won the Tony Award for Best Actor in a Musical and a Grammy Award ® as a principal soloist on the original cast recording for his performance. He made his Broadway debut in RENT at the age of 17. He also starred opposite Lin-Manuel Miranda and Karen Olivo in a 2014 City Center Encores! revival of Jonathan Larson’s Tick, Tick…Boom! In December 2017, Odom returned to the New York City stage in a solo concert at Jazz at Lincoln Center. The cabaret-style performance was crafted around signature songs and music that shaped this artist’s journey, all performed with a world-class band in front of a live audience. The show was filmed for broadcast as an hour-long PBS special as part of the 17-time Emmy Award®-winning series, Live from Lincoln Center, and premiered in April 2018.

A Grammy Award®-winning recording artist, Odom’s self-titled debut album was part-funded by a successful Kickstarter campaign and released in 2014 by Borderlight Entertainment, Inc. His new label home, S-Curve, re-released an expanded version with additional material in June 2016, and the album reached #1 on the Billboard Jazz charts and charted in the Billboard Top 200. In winter 2017, Odom topped the charts once again with the re-release of his second album and first holiday album, Simply Christmas, as a deluxe edition with new arrangements and new songs. Simply Christmas hit #1 on iTunes and the Billboard Jazz charts, #4 on the Billboard Holiday chart, and #31 on the Billboard Top 200 chart. Odom released his third full-length album and first of original material, Mr, in November 2019, and the following October teamed up with nine-time Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum artist Sia to debut a new version of standout track “Cold.” His critically acclaimed second holiday album, The Christmas Album, was released in November 2020. He has performed at the White House, Super Bowl, and on hallowed stages such as Lincoln Center, Rockefeller Center, and the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade.

In March 2018, Odom added the title of author to his resume with the release of his book—Failing Up: How to Take Risks, Aim Higher and Never Stop Learning. Written in the style of a commencement speech, the book brings together what Odom has learned in life so far, tapping into universal themes of starting something new, following your passions, discovering your own potential, and surrounding yourself with the right people. Failing Up is about unlocking your true potential and making your dreams come true even when it seems impossible. The book was published by Feiwel & Friends, an imprint of Macmillan Publishers.

ABOUT THE AWARDEE

Paula Fitzgerald, Esq. is the executive director of Ayuda, a nonprofit that provides legal, social and language services to help low-income immigrants in the Washington, DC, area navigate the immigration and justice systems, heal from trauma and overcome language isolation.

As executive director, Fitzgerald leads Ayuda’s efforts to increase the availability of direct services for more than 8,000 immigrants annually. Under her leadership, Ayuda’s programs have expanded throughout the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia to reach more low-income immigrants. She began her work with Ayuda as an immigration staff attorney and quickly advanced to managing attorney of Ayuda’s Virginia office. Prior to joining Ayuda in 2008, Fitzgerald served as an immigration staff attorney at Hogar Hispano of the Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Arlington and as an associate at Hunton & Williams LLP.

Her immigration legal work focused on humanitarian relief for individuals, children and families. She also has extensive experience in family-based immigration matters, consular processing, waivers and NACARA cases. Fitzgerald credits her mother, a Colombian immigrant who was a social worker at a school with a large Latin American immigrant population, and her father, who worked as a psychologist for the mentally ill at Saint Elizabeth’s Hospital, for instilling the values that led to her work.

Fitzgerald earned a certificate in Nonprofit Management from Georgetown in 2016 and a J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law. She graduated cum laude with a B.A. in psychology from James Madison University. Paula and her family have lived in northern Virginia for more than 40 years.

ABOUT LET FREEDOM RING CELEBRATION

As part of Georgetown University’s MLK Initiative: Let Freedom Ring!, this event builds on the success of the first joint program in January 2003, which featured the legendary Roberta Flack and attracted more than 5,000 patrons. The second, held in August of 2003, commemorated the 40th anniversary of Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech and featured actor, civil rights leader, and 2004 Kennedy Center Honoree, Ossie Davis. Past concerts have featured Jessye Norman in 2004; Aaron Neville in 2005; Yolanda Adams in 2006 and in 2016; Brian McKnight in 2007; Denyce Graves in 2008; Kennedy Center Honoree Aretha Franklin in 2009; India.Arie in 2010; Patti LaBelle in 2011; Bobby McFerrin in 2012; Smokey Robinson in 2013; Dionne Warwick in 2014; Natalie Cole in 2015; Gladys Knight in 2017; Vanessa Williams in 2018; and Audra McDonald and Brian Stokes Mitchell in 2019, and Chaka Khan in 2020.

ABOUT GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY

Established in 1789 by Archbishop John Carroll, Georgetown is the oldest Catholic and Jesuit university in the United States. Located in Washington D.C., Doha, Qatar, and around the world, Georgetown University is a leading academic and research institution, offering a unique educational experience that prepares the next generation of global citizens to lead and make a difference in the world. For more information about Georgetown University, visit Georgetown.edu or connect with Georgetown on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, or Instagram.

Georgetown’s annual MLK Initiative honors Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. through a series of academic, artistic, and extracurricular programs that examine Dr. King’s life and work and address the contemporary challenges our nation faces in order to fulfill his dream of justice and equality for all people. For more information visit: https://www.georgetown.edu/mlk-initiative/

ABOUT THE KENNEDY CENTER’S MILLENNIUM STAGE

Millennium Stage is a manifestation of the Kennedy Center’s mission and vision to welcome all to celebrate our collective cultural heritage in the most inclusive and accessible way possible. Millennium Stage offers free live community performances, streamed live Wednesday–Saturday each week and Sunday matinee film screenings in the Justice Forum.

The series aims to eliminate financial and geographical barriers to the arts and celebrate the human spirits and arts in our society, hopefully, ultimately leading to intercultural understanding. The programs are varied with artists from many different communities and mediums of performing arts so that we are showcasing the story of our country and our world.

A full list of our generous sponsors can be found online.

Discover the Kennedy Center on social media.

# # #

KENNEDY CENTER CONTACT:
Brendan Padgett
BEPadgett@kennedy-center.org

Camryn Hardy
CHardy@kennedy-center.org

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CONTACT:

Georgetown University Media Relations
media@georgetown.edu
(202) 687-4328

From Paula:

“I am humbled to be selected as the 2023 Legacy of a Dream recipient. My mission has always been to make a lasting impact in the lives of others. I can think of no greater honor than being recognized alongside past recipients – fierce advocates and change-makers in our DMV community.”

— Paula Fitzgerald, Esq.

Executive Director, Ayuda

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

Congratulations Paula, my friend!

As I have said many times, “you are totally awesome.” Your brilliance, creativity, “institutionalized kindness,” courage, integrity, work ethic, and leadership by example have built AYUDA into an ever more powerful and dynamic NGO that incorporates all that is best in the DMV area. AYUDA serves as a beacon of hope, humanity, and “grass roots support” for members of our community from around the world.

You empower and inspire everyone around you, which is what great leadership is all about. You are also “one heck of a fundraiser and executive with a vision and the practical skills to make it happen!” And, you continue to recruit, attract, support, and nurture super-talented staff who embody and carry out AYUDA’s community values!

I remember a function honoring the retiring chief executive of an organization I worked for in the past. That individual was highly competent, but not particularly “warm and fuzzy.” The MC, perhaps at a loss for words, turned to the honoree and said: “You were a great fiduciary!”

Being a “vet” of countless retirement ceremonies, I had expected the more traditional good natured “roast” or heartwarming personal anecdotes. At the time, I found the “fiduciary accolade” pretty weird.

Since then, however, carrying that “heightened awareness” with me, I have observed many “not so great fiduciaries.” So, Paula, I’m going to say it: “You are a great fiduciary!”

AYUDA’s many dedicated donors can be assured that you treat each incoming dollar the way you treat each of AYUDA’s clients and staff: With great appreciation, deep respect, and a determination to unlock the full potential for the greater good.

Thanks for all you do for America and humanity, Paula! You indeed “exemplify the spirit of Dr. King!”

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am a member of the AYUDA Advisory Council and an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown Law. I have known Paula and admired her work and values since she first appeared before me as an attorney at the “Legacy” Arlington Immigration Court almost two decades ago.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-20-22

ALERT: Judge Sullivan “Reluctantly” Grants DHS Temporary Stay Until Dec. 22, 2022 To Reinstate Rule Of Law For Asylum Seekers!

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/judge-permanently-enjoins-cdc-border-blockade-title-42-as-of-dec-22-2022

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

Let’s look at this in perspective. Biden ran in 2020 on a platform of ending Title 42 and restoring asylum processing at the border. Almost two years later, after illegally returning hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers without any process at all, his Administration still lacks a coherent, transparent plan to implement asylum law at the border. This wasn’t “rocket science” as there had been an operating asylum system at the border for approximately four decades, since the enactment of the Refugee Act of 1980, until Trump illegally ended it.

After more than a year of dawdling, the Administration eventually, reluctantly, set a May 23, 2022 date to “lift” the illegal Title 42 “blockade,” giving GOP nativists more than ample time to block it.

In the meantime, they squandered time, money, and goodwill thinking of ways to actually extend the illegal removals. Their “defense” of lifting Title 42 was, predictably, half-hearted and inept. Not surprisingly, they were enjoined by nativist right wing judges. Reportedly, many Administration officials breathed a “sigh of relief” that the GOP nativists and their “wholly owned judges” had “bailed them out” from having to actually restore the asylum system and make good on their campaign promises.

Now, another six months have gone by. Garland and Mayorkas still are “not ready for prime time.” Sounds like they thought their “regime of illegal returns” would last forever!

Casts doubt on the good faith of their claim that they wanted to end Title 42 in the first place. Almost all Administrations, once in office, get enamored of the idea that “because it’s only immigrants” they don’t have to treat them as humans. What’s another month of law violations after two years and hundreds of thousands of human rights abuses?

I have little confidence that there will be a functional, due process compliant, asylum system on Dec. 22 at the border. I’m not aware that DHS and EOIR even have the properly trained qualified personnel to correctly and efficiently apply asylum law. There is no known plan for working with the pro bono bar to insure representation and prioritize the many potentially grantable cases.

There is certainly a mind-boggling “leadership void” at both DHS and DOJ on refugee, asylum, and human rights issues. The ill-advised “gimmicks” and “corner-cutting” that Garland and Mayorkas have substituted for competence and expertise in “recently arrived” asylum cases have resulted in elevated denials, hindered representation, and alienated the pro bono bar and human rights NGOs. The latter have far more expertise in asylum law and better ideas on how to efficiently and fairly process refugees and asylees than anyone at either DHS or EOIR. Yet, the experts have intentionally been “frozen out” of the decision-making process.

Additionally, and stunningly, Garland has gone out of his way to alienate and demoralize the already stressed and overextended immigration bar with a insane dose of “Aimless Docket Reshuffling.” Setting “D-Day” for reinstating the law, three days before the Christmas holiday, also seems highly problematic. What could possibly go wrong with a system run by politicos who have spent two years avoiding providing fair hearings to asylum seekers?

In the vacuum created by the Biden Administration’s incompetence and lack of leadership, racist GOP governors have taken control of “asylum resettlement” and conducted it in ways calculated to cause the most disruption, cruelty, and suffering for the political pawns (actually humans) that Biden has abandoned.

This does not sound like a “dressed for success” plan to restore a fair and efficient asylum system. But, after two years of adapting and using clearly illegal methods instead of competently handling human rights issues, the Biden group has gotten very used to “programmed failure” and shifting the blame to Trump (out of office since Jan. 20, 2021), the hapless victims, and their lawyers.

I hope I’m wrong. But, I strongly suspect that it’s going to take more than Judge Sullivan’s order to end the disingenuous “Miller Lite” approach to immigration within the Biden Administration and usher in an era of expertise, competence, integrity, and courage in addressing human rights.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-18-22

☠️🤯🤮🚫 AFTER WINNING YEARS-LONG BATTLE TO STOP ILLEGAL REFUGEE REMOVALS BY TRUMP & BIDEN, WEARY HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATES FACE DAUNTING NEW CHALLENGE: Garland’s Dysfunctional Due-Process-Denying “Courts” — Key Empirical Info Lacking, But We Do Know One Important Thing: Garland’s Latest Docket “Gimmick” — Time Limits — Sharply Reduces Chances Of Success, From Probable Grant (52%) To Likely Denial! — Quality Control & Grotesque Inconsistencies Remain Unaddressed In Dem AG’s “Race To Deny” Legal Protection!🤮

Judge Roy Bean — “Judge” Roy Bean (1825-1903)
American Saloon Keeper & “Jurist”
Public Realm
His reputation for “rough justice” in the West would be right at home in the “Asylum Free Zones” of Garland’s EOIR. Bean “was once trying a Mexican on a charge of horse stealing and his charge was the shortest on record: Gentlemen of the Jury, there’s a greaser in the box and a hoss missing. You know your duty, and they did.”

Here’s the latest analysis of Garland’s ongoing abuse of his office from Austin Kocher, PhD, at TRAC:

https://trac.syr.edu/reports/702/

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

If someone NOT Merrick “What Me Worry” Garland (the “Alfred E. Neumann of Biden’s immigration bureaucracy”) took a look at the data, one major thing would jump out! There are likely more than 400,000 refugees entitled to asylum sitting in Garland’s 770,000 case asylum backlog (52% x 770,000). (The asylum backlog at EOIR is a “subset” of Garland’s largely self-inflicted, ever mushrooming, nearly 2 million case EOIR backlog — more judges have produced more backlog, so that’s likely NOT the answer here).

And, this is in a system currently governed by skewed anti-asylum BIA “precedents” and a chronic “anti-asylum culture” actively encouraged and fed by the Trump Administration. In a properly staffed and functioning court system with qualified, due-process oriented, judges and an expert BIA that enforced some decisional consistency and properly and generously interpreted asylum law, a “grant rate” of 75% or more would be a plausible expectation.

Given the obvious (and I would argue intentional) lack of reliable data on how a legitimate asylum system, one consisting at all levels of judges with well-recognized expertise in asylum law and human rights, and overseen by competent, due-process-oriented judicial administrators, might function, the 75% figure is just an “educated guesstimate.” But, it matches my own personal experience over 13 years on the bench in the (now defunct) Arlington Immigration Court.

It’s also in line with my recent conversations with the head of one of the largest NGOs in the DMV area involved in meeting busses and counseling those “orbited” from the Southern border by the racist/nativist GOP Govs that Biden, curiously, has chosen to run our domestic refugee resettlement program. This is a person who, unlike Garland, his lieutenants, and most of the other politicos and nativist blowhards participating in the “border travesty,” actually spent years of a career representing individuals in Immigration Court. They estimated that “at least 70%” of the “arriving bus riders” had very viable asylum claims.

This is a far cry from the nativist, restrictionist myths promoted by both the Trump and Biden Administrations — obviously to cover up their gross human rights violations in knowingly and illegally returning hundreds of thousands of legal refugees to danger zones! Many human rights experts would consider such gross misconduct to be “crimes against humanity.” Consequently, it doesn’t take much imagination to see why self-interested scofflaw officials like Garland, Mayorkas, and White House advisors seek to manipulate the system to keep the asylum grant rates artificially low while eschewing proper, realistically robust use of the overseas refugee program to take the pressure off the border — by acting legally rather than illegally!

Almost all the EOIR asylum backlog consists of “regular docket” (I use this term lightly with EOIR where “normalcy” is unknown) cases. Those are refugees who have had time to get lawyers, adequately prepare, document their cases, but are stuck in Garland’s chronically dysfunctional system. Consequently, they are “denied by delay” legal immigration status, a chance to get green cards, and to eventually qualify for citizenship. The American economy is denied an important source of legal workers who should be part of our permanent workforce and well on their way to full participation in our political system and society!

An expert looking at this system would see a “golden opportunity” to move most of the backlogged “easily grantable” asylum cases out of the system with stipulated grants or short hearings (the kind you actually might be able to do 3-4 a day without stepping on anyone’s due-process rights or driving the private bar nuts). These cases would also avoid the BIA’s appellate backlog, as well as eliminating unnecessary workload in the U.S. Circuit Courts (which already have their own inconsistency, rubber stamp, and bias issues in the human rights/racial justice area that seem to be getting worse, not better).

Knocking 400,000+ cases off the backlog wouldn’t completely solve Garland’s 2 million case backlog problem — only a complete “house cleaning” at EOIR, replacing many of the current bureaucrats with competent leaders and expert Immigration Judges well-versed in asylum law, will do that. But, cutting EOIR’s backlog by 20% (and the asylum backlog by over 50%) without stomping on anyone’s rights, while bolstering much-needed legal immigration, and harnessing the strengths of the private/pro bono bar, is nothing to “sneeze at!” That’s particularly true in comparison with Garland’s two years of mindless “designed to fail” gimmicks and astounding mismanagement, which have produced exactly the opposite results!

How bad has Garland’s leadership been at on human rights, due process, and racial justice at DOJ. A number of seasoned asylum practitioners have told me that today’s EOIR, also suffering from a tidal wave of Garland’s “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” — is actually significantly worse than it was under Trump! That’s right, Garland’s tone-deaf incompetence has exceeded the disorder and systemic unfairness caused by overt xenophobia, anti-asylum bias, misogyny, “dumbing down,” and enforcement-biased “weaponization” of the Sessions/Barr years.

As for Dr. Kocher’s cogent observation that input from the Immigration Judges who actually decide these cases is a “missing ingredient,” good luck with that, my friend! Perhaps understandably in light of his unseemly failures at EOIR, Garland has taken EOIR’s traditional opaqueness and “muzzling” of Immigration Judges to new heights — even barring their participation in CLE events aimed at improving the level of practice before his courts.

Apparently, “studied incompetence” in a Democratic Administration can be even worse than the “malicious incompetence” of the Trump Kakistocracy — at least where immigrants rights/human rights/racial justice/ women’s rights are concerned at EOIR. That’s an astounding observation! One that I actually never thought I’d hear from practitioners!

The only way for human rights and racial justice experts and advocates to “communicate” with Garland in his “ivory tower” is to ‘“sue his tail” in court! Judge Sullivan’s recent opinion finding Title 42 illegal incorporates the very facts and law used by human rights experts and advocates in years of fruitless pleading and begging Garland to “cease and desist” his support for unlawful conduct and “just follow the law.” The latter seems like a modest “no-brainer” request to a guy once nominated by an Dem President for the Supremes.

Waiting for Merrick Garland to fix the mess at EOIR to provide even a bare minimum of due process and rational administration is like waiting for the guy pictured below. Frustrated and “Garland-weary” as they might be, human rights advocates should take it to heart and act accordingly!

Waiting for Godot — Waiting for Merrick Garland and his “clueless crew” at DOJ to fix the dysfunctional Immigration Courts will be an exercise in futility. He only pays attention when ordered by a Federal Judge, which, somewhat ironically, he used to be. But, he’s proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” that he is unqualified to run one of the most important and life-determining Federal Judiciaries — one where due process has been buried beneath an avalanche of expediency, incompetency, intellectual dishonesty, and dumb gimmicks. When will “enough be enough?”
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-17-22

🇺🇸⚖️ “BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD” IS A WIDELY-ACCEPTED EMPIRICALLY- SUPPORTED CONCEPT OF AMERICAN LAW — BUT NOT @ GARLAND’S DYSFUNCTIONAL EOIR! — The “Gang of 4,” Lory, Rekha, Sue, & I, With “Practical Scholarship” On How & Why To Argue For 21st Century Jurisprudence In A System Too-Often Wedded To The Past!

Lory Rosenberg — Hon. Lory Diana Rosenberg
Senior Advisor
Immigrant Defenders Law Group, PLLC

Rekha Aharma-Crawford — Rekha Sharma-Crawford ESQUIRE
Partner and Co-Founder Sharma-Crawford Law
Kansas City, KS

Hon. Susan G. Roy
Law Office of Susan G. Roy, LLC
Princeton Junction, NJ
Member, Round Table of Former Immigration Judges

Here it is “Time for a Child Welfare Approach to Cancellation of Removal:”

https://lnkd.in/gaDgHRD8

19110103h (1).pdf

drive.google.com

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

So honored to collaborate with my colleagues Lory, Sue, and Rekha on this. Grateful to AILA for publishing. This resulted from lively conversations and brainstorming when we served as faculty at the Immigration Trial College sponsored by Rekha’s firm in Kansas City in April 2022!

We all hope that this “practical scholarship” will give ideas to practitioners on how to argue for a “child centered approach.” That the BIA is one of the American authorities NOT following this better approach, supported by compelling empirical evidence, is a testament to how badly broken and in desperately needing reform our Immigration Courts are today. They aren’t going to change on their own. So, start arguing for a better approach, now!

There’s also some “insider BIA history” in here from those of us “expelled” for our aggressive, progressive judicial views on due process, fundamental fairness, and best practices! Namely, Lory and me!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

😎🗽⚖️👍🏼

PWS

11-16-22

🤯 “HOW TO SUCCEED IN BUILDING BACKLOG” — Latest BIA Miscue On Retroactivity in 7th Cir. Sure To Generate Re-openings, Remands, & Other Forms Of Backlog Enhancing, Due Process Denying “Aimless Docket Reshuffling!” — Garland’s Inexcusable Mis-Management Of EOIR Is Boiling Over Among Dem Base!

From Dan Kowalski @ LexisNexis Immigration Community:

Daniel M. Kowalski

8 Nov 2022

retroactivity

cimt

CA7 on CIMT, Retroactivity: Zaragoza v. Garland

Zaragoza v. Garland

“Dulce Zaragoza, a native and citizen of Mexico and a lawful permanent resident of the United States, pleaded guilty to the Indiana offense of criminal neglect of a dependent after locking her six-year-old son in a closet for six hours. She was sentenced to one year in jail suspended to time served plus 30 days, with the remainder of the sentence to be served on probation. After completing her sentence, she traveled abroad and presented herself for admission when she returned. The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) found her inadmissible based on the neglect conviction, which the agency classified as a “crime involving moral turpitude.” 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I). She was placed in removal proceedings. Zaragoza fought removal on several grounds, with her arguments expanding as the proceedings progressed. Before the immigration judge, she argued that the Indiana neglect offense does not qualify as a crime involving moral turpitude. The judge disagreed and entered a removal order, and Zaragoza appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA” or “the Board”). In the meantime, she petitioned the state court to modify her sentence. Her purpose was to bring herself within the so-called “petty offense” exception to inadmissibility, which is available to first-time offenders sentenced to six months or less. Id. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II). The state court obliged and reduced her one-year sentence to 179 days. With that order in hand, Zaragoza argued before the BIA that Indiana’s neglect offense is not a crime involving moral turpitude, and regardless, the petty-offense exception applies. The BIA rejected both arguments, agreeing with the immigration judge that the Indiana offense is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude, and further holding that the sentence-modification order was not effective to establish Zaragoza’s eligibility for the petty-offense exception. For the latter conclusion, the Board relied on a recent decision of the Attorney General declaring that state-court sentence modification orders are effective for immigration purposes only if based on a legal defect in the underlying criminal proceeding. Matter of Thomas & Thompson (“Thomas”), 27 I. & N. Dec. 674, 690 (Att’y Gen. 2019). Zaragoza sought reconsideration, this time adding two more arguments: (1) the phrase “crime involving moral turpitude” is unconstitutionally vague; and (2) the Attorney General’s decision in Thomas is impermissibly retroactive as applied to her. The BIA disagreed on both counts. Zaragoza petitioned for review in this court, reprising the entire array of arguments she presented to the Board. We agree with the BIA’s resolution of all issues but one: applying Thomas in Zaragoza’s case is an impermissibly retroactive application of a new rule. We therefore remand to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

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

Commentary from Kevin A. Gregg, ESQ:

Kevin A. Gregg

• 1st

Partner at Kurzban Kurzban Tetzeli & Pratt P.A. & Host of Immigration Review Podcast

2d • Edited •

2 days ago

Crimmigration attorneys, get your motions ready.

At least in Chicago! Matter of Thomas and Thompson CANNOT be applied retroactively in the Seventh Circuit!

Sentence modifications/clarifications/European vacations obtained pre-T&T and that comply with Matter of Cota Vargas/Song/Estrada must be recognized for immigration purposes!

Also, when will A.G. Garland weigh in on Matter of Thomas and Thompson? The time is now.

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

When the BIA starts not with the correct legal concept that retroactivity is disfavored in the law, but rather with “how can we best help DHS Enforcement and/or curry favor and job security from our political ‘handlers’ at DOJ,” “bad things are going to happen.” And, they do, over and over!

There are plenty of well-qualified “practical scholars” out here who understand retroactivity in the immigration context and would get these basic questions right in the first instance without bothering the Courts of Appeals or generating disorder, inconsistency, and unnecessary backlog! Why hasn’t Garland recruited them to be the “New and Improved BIA” that would actually be driven by legal expertise, practical scholarship, due process, and fundamental fairness? The latter are qualities that EOIR and DOJ claims it seeks in Immigration Judges. But, it’s not the reality that practitioners too often actually face in todays dysfunctional, inefficient, and hopelessly backlogged EOIR.

The public and those subject to substandard judging and often dehumanizing treatment by EOIR are suffering — amazingly, now more than ever! When will Garland do his job and reform his courts to conform to due process, fundamental fairness, best interpretations of law, and best practices?

The latter desirable qualities, actually necessary for any legitimate judiciary, are certainly NOT descriptive of today’s broken EOIR! Garland and his lieutenants might consider themselves “above the fray!”

But, my already over-stuffed e-mailbox is “lighting up” with EOIR horror stories from experienced, long-time practitioners who are questioning whether they can continue practicing in the hostile, lawless, “no due process,” “no customer service,” “no common sense,” “blame the victim” environment that Garland has allowed to mushroom, and sometimes even encouraged, at EOIR.

I mentioned the term “Dedicated Docket” at an Executive Session of a major NGO recently. The anger and disgust that it provoked from those actually “doing the job” of fighting for justice in Garland’s broken system was palpable!

Why is a Democratic Administration that is, despite beating expectations in the midterms, still hanging on by a thread, inflicting this type of disrespect, pain, and suffering on its own loyal supporters? How will this self-created legal, Constitutional, human rights disaster play out moving toward 2024!

“The EOIR HQ Tower” needs a complete shake-up and replacement of those who have demonstrated their inability to get the job done with those who can! The latter are out here. But, the worse Garland lets his system get, the harder and most costly (dollars and lives) it will be to fix it!

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-11-22

🆘 ATTN NDPA: THE FUTURE IS NOW! — AS PRACTITIONER ANGER AND FRUSTRATION WITH GARLAND’S DYSFUNCTIONAL “COURTS” BOILS OVER, GETTING YOURSELF “ON THE BENCH” & FORCING RATIONALITY, DUE PROCESS, & FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS “FROM THE INSIDE” IS THE BEST, PERHAPS ONLY, OPTION AT PRESENT! — Here Are 10 Chances To do Just That!

Garland is a disgraceful failure as our nation’s top lawyer; Congress is deadlocked and uninterested in solving immigration and human rights problems; Federal Courts, these days often “stacked” with far-right ideologues, too often look the other way at gross violations of due process, overt racism, misogyny, and bad interpretations as long as it’s “only migrants of color” (“non-persons” in the view of some) and their lawyers whose lives are being trashed. At best, the Circuits provide widely inconsistent review and results — perhaps not quite as bad as EOIR, but still far beyond anything that would be acceptable if migrants were actually treated as “persons” as the Constitution clearly provides.

I receive some desperate anecdotal complaints about the absurdly broken system and unprofessional conduct by some IJs and EOIR officials here at “Courtside.”

Here’s a recent one from a long-time practitioner that more or less sums up Garland and the Biden Administration’s incredibly disreputable mal-administration of EOIR:

Everything at EOIR is such a disgrace. It is now very difficult for me to appear before IJs, as I have complete contempt for the agency. It is so much worse now than when Trump was in charge. But of course, EOIR could care less, and obviously, this IJ could care less as well…

“Much worse now than when Trump was in charge!” Let that sink in folks!

As I’ve said before, “This just isn’t right!” But, we seem to be dealing with three branches of “Government” who have simply turned their collective backs on the Constitution, the rule of law, common sense, and the fundamental obligations of decency that human beings owe to each other. They also deny the truth: That immigrants are and will continue to be an essential part of the fabric of our society. So, many have asked me “What’s the answer?”

Storm the fort “from the inside!” Use your superior knowledge, organizational, and problem solving skills to get on the Immigration Bench and get paid to do things the right way, help force systemic change over time, save some very deserving lives, and help preserve and improve our democracy at the same time.

One of the few advantages of working in an “out of control” system is this: there isn’t much control. That often motivates sloppy work, corner-cutting, and a “who cares” approach.

But, it can also motivate and allow those with the skills and moral integrity to “do the right thing,” to put due process first, solve problems (satisfying), and institute “best practices” rather than worst practices in YOUR courtroom, even if only on a case-by-case basis. And, guess what? Things that “work” and efficiently resolve problems in your courtroom do impact the rest of the system!

Eventually, it can lead to demands to stop doing things the same old wrong and unfair way and start start treating others fairly and with dignity. Surprisingly, despite persistent bureaucratic myths to the contrary, doing things the right way and treating everyone fairly is more efficient than repeating the same old mistakes, based on the same old discredited “deterrence myths,” over and over. Recognizing and timely granting deserving cases is the very best, totally overlooked, way of cutting backlog and forcing the system to be more efficient without stomping on anyone’s rights or humanity!

Sure, the EOIR system only superficially claims to be interested in efficiency. What they really want is the “appearance of efficiency” with the ability to shift blame for problems to the “victims” of their incredibly poor performance!

But, eventually enough folks in the right places can get the idea that doing things the right way could actually be better for the system than repeating past mistakes and covering up. The latter gets stressful, even for politicos and bureaucrats who have made careers out of avoiding accountability and responsibility. And, there are certainly plenty of those in today’s EOIR and DOJ.

So here are 10 great opportunities to “get on the inside” and start fixing justice in America and the critical “retail level.”

Seven open IJ positions:

Working for the U.S. Department of Justice allows you to make a difference every day through public service. As an immigration judge you provide due process while deciding cases that have immediate impact. Next week, EOIR will announce the opportunity to apply for immigration judge positions. EOIR will post the vacancy announcement to USAJobs and announce it via the IJ Jobs listserv. The announcement will offer opportunities for immigration courts in the following locations:

Adelanto, CA

Concord, CA

Imperial, CA

San Francisco, CA

LaSalle, LA

Boston (Lowell), MA

El Paso, TX

If you would like to learn more about qualifications and the process for becoming an immigration judge, please visit our informational page.

Here are three Assistant Chief Judge (“ACIJ”) positions:

https://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/assistant-chief-immigration-judge-10

It is REALLY important that great attorneys of all genders and ethnic groups apply for these important positions. EOIR has NEVER been representative of either the communities it serves or the talent and diversity of the private immigration/human rights bar. The “bureaucratic excuse” has been that the “pool” of USG applicants, particularly those from DHS and prosecutorial backgrounds, is always far “superior.”

I call BS! But, the only way to “prove it wrong” is if “the best and brightest” from the private sectors apply en masse.

EOIR will NOT improve voluntarily. Over the past two disgraceful years, Garland has proved that “beyond a reasonable doubt.” So, get on the inside and start changing this system to promote impeccable scholarship, due process, fundamental fairness, and best practices from the inside and from “the bottom up!”

Because, waiting for Merrick Garland and his “clueless” crew @ DOJ and EOIR to get the job done for equal justice and racial justice in America will be like “Waiting for Godot.” And, we all know how that turns out.

Apply now! Ask questions later!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-10-22

☠️🪦🏴‍☠️ AMERICA’S BORDER “POLICY:” PASS MORE BODY BAGS, PLEASE! — Cynical GOP Lies, Bumbling Dems, Bad Righty Judges, Deadlocked Congress, Public Indifference To Human Suffering & Reality Prove A Deadly Concoction For Legal Asylum Seekers!

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2022/nov/06/us-mexico-border-body-bags-pile-up?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Alexandra Villarreal reports for The Guardian:

. . . .

Along the 2,000-mile (3,219km) boundary between the US and Mexico, the 2022 fiscal year proved the deadliest on record for people trying to make unauthorized crossings of this heavily patrolled international line.

In just 12 months, more than 800 migrants lost their lives in search of a better one as they disappeared beneath the tumultuous waters of the Rio Grande, succumbed to blistering summer heat, crashed in a smuggler’s vehicle, tumbled from a border barrier, or otherwise had their travels violently cut short.

In Eagle Pass’s regional enforcement sector alone, border patrol agents discovered more than 200 dead migrants between October 2021 and the end of July, compared to an already heartbreaking 34 bodies during the entire 2020 fiscal year.

Ahead of this week’s crucial midterm elections, Republicans have manipulated these harrowing statistics as yet another opportunity to make much ado about what various rightwing players call Joe Biden’s “open border policies”, accusing his administration of incompetence that is causing “body bags [to] keep piling up”.

It’s close to sealed by a hostile combination of pandemic-era public health measures cynically retooled as federal immigration control and mass policing by state troops who arrest, jail and criminalize migrants.

Cruelly, these hardline deterrence mechanisms advanced by both Democrats and Republicans have probably only made the US’s south-west border bloodier.

Current US policy is predicated on a false assumption that if only the consequences for crossing the south-west border are severe enough, people will stop trying.

For decades, presidential administrations with disparate political views have unified under the paradigm of prevention through deterrence, erecting physical and legal obstacles to discourage people from crossing.

Advertisement

Support the Guardian and enjoy the app ad-free.

Support the Guardian

Deterrence as a strategy has informed some of the US’s most controversial immigration policies, from separating families, to detaining children, to stranding asylum seekers in dangerous Mexican border towns.

But desperate people still find ways to make it on to US soil: last fiscal year, Customs and Border Protection documented nearly 2.38m enforcement encounters at the southern border, a record high causing headaches for Biden as conservatives accuse the president of being “lax” on border crime.

The truth is more complex, and not at all lax. More than a million of last fiscal year’s border enforcement encounters were processed under Title 42, now invoked as a federal immigration enforcement tool but originally disguised as a public health measure amid the Covid-19 pandemic.

The policy allowed the Trump and now the Biden administrations to expel huge numbers of people from the US without even letting them ask for asylum, seemingly in violation of domestic and international law.

Far from ending unauthorized migration, the invocation of Title 42 has in fact dramatically inflated the number of encounters at the US-Mexico border, as people who are expelled feel compelled to cross again – and again, and again. Sometimes, relentless migrants have been so determined to complete their journeys that they have risked life and limb dozens of times, fueling a political and humanitarian disaster.

Yet even though these expulsions have proved ill-advised both optically and ethically, Biden has now expanded the use of Title 42 by adding Venezuelans to the list of nationalities targeted for return to Mexico, an apparent betrayal of his campaign promises to uphold the legal right to seek asylum and a paradox as his administration ostensibly fights to sunset the practice in court.

. . . .

And both parties continue to police people seeking security and opportunity over violence, persecution and poverty as if they’re national security threats.

In the shadow of it all, the corpses amass.

Back in Eagle Pass, locals like Rosalinda Medrano who have lived for decades along a porous border understand that migrants have and will always come or, increasingly, die trying.

Advertisement

Support the Guardian and enjoy the app ad-free.

Support the Guardian

“Even though there’s one fence, and another fence, and so many troopers, and the national guard, and you name it – Border Patrol, here and there and everywhere – it’s not gonna stop these families,” she said, adding simply: “They want a better life.”

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

Read the complete article at the link, in which Alexandra points to the numerous achievable solutions that both parties eschew — for political reasons — some cynical, dishonest, and racist (GOP) — others cowardly (Dems). None of what Alexandra reports will come as news to faithful readers of Courtside, or, indeed, to anyone who has taken the time to actually study and reflect on America’s decades of expensive, inhumane, “deterrence policies.”

Fact is, existing law, if correctly applied and administered, offers some obvious ways to start solving the problem:

Robust realistic “overseas” refugee programs in the Western Hemisphere — 150,000 would be a modest start — rather than the piddling, restricted numbers now slowly doled out by the Biden Administration.
Reopen legal ports of entry to legal asylum seekers, as required by law, to incentivize and reward them for not seeking to cross between ports of entry.
Staff the Asylum Office and the Immigration Courts with real experts in asylum law (there are plenty of well-qualified lawyers now in the private sector) who are committed to due process and can rapidly recognize and grant the many meritorious cases. Then, individuals are admitted in legal status, on their way to green cards, rather than aimlessly wandering the US with government-issued packets of misinformation (or no information at all) waiting for hearings that will come either too soon or too late, but never in a reasonable manner and often with incorrect preordained results designed to abuse the legal system as an “enforcement deterrent.” (NOTE: To act as an incentive/reward for appearing at ports of entry, the asylum system must be credible, transparent, and timely — something that no Administration has achieved to date, but which is possible with more vision, leadership, and better personnel making decisions.)
Work with, bolster, support, and learn from the many NGOs in the U.S. to insure that asylum seekers are informed of their obligations, represented on their applications, and resettled, mostly away from the borders to areas that need them, in an orderly fashion.
Additional huge benefit: Despite the lies and myths spread by nativists, increasing legal immigration (including refugees and asylees) is one of the few potentially effective ways that the “political branches” of Government have to address inflation without causing recession. See, e.g., https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-covid-immigration-makes-inflation-worse-recession-outlook-jobs-supply-2022-10.

“Even though there’s one fence, and another fence, and so many troopers, and the national guard, and you name it – Border Patrol, here and there and everywhere – it’s not gonna stop these families,” she said, adding simply: “They want a better life.”

We can, and must, do better than “more body bags” as a matter of national policy! Migrants aren’t going to stop coming. That, we can’t change in the long run — no matter how many lies, myths, and distortions nativists throw out there, and no matter how fast spineless Dem politicos run from or attempt to hide the truth. But, we can deal with reality in a more humane, practical, realistic manner that will serve our nation’s, and humanity’s, interests into the future.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-10-22

⚖️ REPRESENTATION WORKS IN IMMIGRATION COURT: Why Isn’t Garland’s EOIR Promoting & Enabling It Rather Than Engaging In More “Aimless Docket Reshuffling?”

Atenas Burrola Estrada
Author
American Immigration Council
PHOTO: American immigration council.org

https://immigrationimpact.com/2022/10/27/immigrants-win-cases-pro-bono-justice-campaign/

71% of Immigrants Win Their Cases Thanks to Pro Bono Volunteers with the Immigration Justice Campaign

Posted by Atenas Burrola Estrada | Oct 27, 2022 | Due Process & the Courts, Immigration Courts

Every year at the end of October, legal service providers come together to celebrate Pro Bono Week. It is a dedicated opportunity to acknowledge the amazing work that our volunteers do—work that is the foundation of the American Immigration Council’s Immigration Justice Campaign. In an immigration system that is set up to make it almost impossible for certain groups of people to win, pro bono volunteers are one of the bastions helping overwhelmed legal service providers hold the line for due process and justice.

From the solo practitioner doing pro bono work to learn a new skill, to the corporate law firm partner who has incorporated pro bono as part of their practice for two decades, our volunteers run the gamut. Everyone makes a difference—from the law students interpreting between classes and homework to the community members who volunteer simply because they care. Every single volunteer is integral to the Justice Campaign’s work—and we thank them for their time and dedication.

Since its creation in 2017, the Justice Campaign and our volunteers have walked alongside hundreds of immigrants in their fight for justice and due process in the United States.

This year alone, over 200 Justice Campaign volunteers have:

Worked on 221 cases for detained individuals in 14 detention centers across the country.

Worked on 335 cases for non-detained individuals across 32 states of residence.

Served clients from 30 countries of origin who speak 19 different languages.

And with these volunteers’ help:

71% of clients have won their immigration case.

85% of clients asking for release from detention have won that release from an immigration judge.

Nationally, only 40% of people win their immigration cases, and only 32% win their release from an immigration judge. Those numbers are even lower for people without an attorney. Detained immigrants without an attorney only have about an 11% chance of winning release.

This small example of Justice Campaign clients and volunteers shows the immediate impact that pro bono work has on clients’ lives. Without the dedication of our pro bono volunteers, many of these individuals would have had to move forward alone. Statistically speaking, that means most probably would have lost.

The past several years have been difficult for most of the world in so many ways. And yet, pro bono volunteers continue showing up every day, allowing the Justice Campaign to continue serving clients, help people get out of detention, fight their cases—and for many, win. To the hundreds of volunteers who have worked with the Justice Campaign, this year and every year, thank you. We could not do this work without you.

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

This reality bears little resemblance to the myths and false narratives about the impact of representation put out by nativists and parroted by EOIR during the Trump years. Nor does it match the gimmicks and poor planning of the Biden Administration, which continues to operate on the false assumption that the vast majority of asylum cases in Immigration Court will be denials.

While this sample is probably too small to be statistically valid, it certainly supports the view that the current mess at EOIR unjustly leaves behind many asylum seekers and other individuals entitled to relief just because they are unrepresented or poorly represented. It also make them much more likely to remain in detention, costly for both them and the Government.

It would make sense for EOIR and the Biden Administration to work cooperatively with the pro bono and low bono bar to prioritize and increase representation and to then prioritize represented cases that are most likely to result in grants of relief. Those cases are likely to proceed faster (without any due-process-denying “gimmicks”), less likely to be appealed, and would seldom reach the Courts of Appeals. An overall efficient way to use resources.

Additionally, EOIR should be working more closely with VIISTA Villanova and others who have developed “scalable” programs for training accredited representatives to increase quality representation in Immigration Court.

Instead, with yet another round of mindless “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” on steroids, EOIR has instigated an unnecessary and counterproductive “pitched battle” with advocates across America. Go figure!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-04-22

🤯🤮👎🏽👎🏽👎🏽👎🏽👎🏽☠️ THIS JUST ISN’T RIGHT! — GARLAND’S “HALLOWEEN HOUSE OF HORRORS @ EOIR” & THE PUNISHMENT HE & HIS UNQUALIFIED, OUT OF TOUCH JUDGES ARE INFLICTING ON VULNERABLE HUMANS & ATTORNEYS DOING THEIR JOBS HAS TO END!

Grim Reaper — As someone who has not represented asylum seekers in his “Houses of Horror” and who disdains engaging with those who have, Merrick Garland has shown that he is unqualified to be Attorney General of the US. His “Clown Courts” are now “Houses of Horror” that are no joke, particularly for those who have to deal with his beyond dysfuntional mess on a daily basis! Reaper Image: Hernan Fednan, Creative Commons License

I received this from a practitioner in response my earlier post about Garland’s ongoing scheduling and due process fiasco @ EOIR:

Glad you wrote this. It has been so hard. I am working 7 days a week and feel like I am losing my mind. Hopefully they start making changes, because how this is currently going is just not sustainable. Many of the Judges are not granting the continuances or making you go to the IH and giving you a hard time about it. Multiple Judges told me a month or even less notice was “plenty of time.” O boy!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-26-22

🤯 BREAKING: DUE PROCESS MELTDOWN @ EOIR: 140 PRACTITIONERS, EXPERTS, ACADEMICS, NGOs PROTEST GARLAND’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL & UNETHICAL “SCHEDULING” & “AIMLESS DOCKET RESHUFFLING” (“ADR”) ON STEROIDS IN IMMIGRATION COURTS!

By Paul Wickham Schmidt

Courtside Special

Oct. 26, 2022

“Due process cannot exist if an attorney does not have sufficient time and advance notice to prepare for a case.”

The above is an elementary statement of the minimum requirement for due process in any court setting! Yet, in the “wacky world of Garland’s EOIR” 🤯 it is being knowingly and intentionally violated hundreds of times each day!

Not only does this inhibit effective professional representation of those fortunate enough to have lawyers, but it actively discourages attorneys from taking on cases in Immigration Court, particularly those acting in a pro bono or low bono capacity. How will we interest and inspire new lawyers to get into the practice when this is the way they can expect to be treated? It’s a truly disgusting and disgraceful development!

The following letter from a consortium of practitioners, academics, and NGO leaders protests the insane, due-process-denying lack of notice and the “Aimless Docket Reshuffling on steroids” ongoing @ EOIR and makes suggestions for constructive changes to restore at least some order to Garland’s dysfunctional courts. In my view, this situation raises huge Constitutional, ethical, and policy issues affecting all justice in America! It also illustrates the incredibly poor judgement and dismissive attitude of the Biden Administration and Garland’s DOJ in approaching the most serious “life or death” issues involving human rights and racial justice!

Among the signers:

NJ AILA chapter signed on, former judges, Rocky Mountain Advocacy Network, professors, CGRS, ASAP (150,000 members), NC Justice Center, etc. Attorneys practicing in every state + DC + Puerto Rico ended up signing-on to this letter.

I am a signatory. As you know, many of us believe that the ongoing intentional deterioration of due process, fundamental fairness, and best practices at EOIR is a preventable national disgrace that is undermining equal justice and democratic institutions in America. Consequently, I think it is critical to keep this issue “in the public eye” and to demand constructive, common sense reforms at EOIR.

The “constructive suggestions” contained in the letter are great! But, it’s a colossal waste of time and resources to have unqualified bureaucrats, far removed from the actual practice before these dysfunctional “courts,” unilaterally institute these ill-advised, unethical, due-process denying changes. Then, it’s left to the “outside experts” to drop everything and “plead and beg” for common sense and sanity from an arrogant, dysfunctional system!

The American justice system can’t continue to afford to let this wasteful and highly counterproductive “clown show” 🤡 go on unabated! It’s up to everyone who cares about equal justice in America (NOT just immigration practitioners) to demand that Merrick Garland get rid of the incompetents at EOIR and replace them with expert administrators and real, well-qualified judges who are “practical scholars” in the law, understand the needs of justice, and will reform this broken system to work for the best interests of everyone in America!

Here’s a copy of the letter, as sent:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kb25xExBERwZG65EbGZ9iR29UoQiGLL6/view?usp=sharing

🇺🇸“Due Process Forever!”

Paul⚖️🗽😎

10-26-22

🗽DeSANTIS’S NATIVIST SCHEME MIGHT HELP PUT MIGRANTS IN LINE FOR GREEN CARDS — But, It’s Still An Arduous Process With Nothing Guaranteed!

From Politico:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/13/transported-migrants-may-be-on-a-path-to-citizenship-because-of-desantis-flights-00061671

By JESÚS A. RODRÍGUEZ

10/13/2022 02:24 PM EDT

When nearly 50 Venezuelan migrants were left stranded in Martha’s Vineyard last month after Florida GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis flew them to the island from Texas, they had no employment, housing or clear pathway to citizenship.

But this week, the Bexar County Sheriff’s Office, which oversees the San Antonio area and previously opened an investigation into the flights, agreed to certify that the migrants had sufficiently cooperated with its investigation and are now eligible to apply for “U” visas, a kind of immigration status for victims of certain crimes that occur on U.S. soil.

The visas require that a law enforcement officer sign the application before it can be sent to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Rachel Self, a Martha’s Vineyard-based attorney who has been coordinating the migrants’ immigration cases, said Wednesday that she flew to San Antonio to obtain the required signatures from the sheriff’s office.

“I now hold in my hand certifications for every one of Perla’s victims,” Self wrote in a statement, referring to Perla Huerta, the woman believed to be responsible for recruiting migrants in San Antonio on behalf of DeSantis.

. . . .

The U visa process, however, won’t be easy or quick, either. According to Department of Homeland Security data, more than 285,000 U visa petitions are pending as of fiscal year 2021, and Congress has capped the visas at 10,000 per year. Once the visas are approved, the migrants must wait three years to apply for a green card and five more years for citizenship.

But once the Venezuelans submit their applications, they will likely be allowed to work and protected from deportation. Last year, the federal appellate court that covers Massachusetts ruled that a Honduran man could not be removed from the country while his U visa application was pending.

“Ironically by choosing to transport the migrants to Martha’s Vineyard […], all of these victims are now protected from removal while their U visa application is pending due to the Granados Benitez case,” Self wrote in her statement. “These certifications will ensure that the migrants can continue to help our law enforcement officials, and that they will be able to process and heal from the incredibly traumatic experiences they have suffered as a result of the cruel, heartless acts committed against them.”

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

Read the complete article at the link.

Still lots of uncertainties. But, at least they have a shot, including access to competent lawyers. That’s more than one can say about future Venezuelan refugees who will be improperly returned to potentially deadly conditions in Mexico under Biden’s version of “Stephen Miller’s closed border fiasco.” See, e.g., https://immigrationcourtside.com/2022/10/12/%e2%98%a0%ef%b8%8f%f0%9f%a4%ae-biden-betrays-asylum-seekers-scofflaw-miller-lite-policy-will-use-bogus-legal-rationale-to-return-venezuelan-refuge/

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-15-22

⚖️ “HON. SIR JEFFREY OF CLAIRVOYANCE” — The Day After His Blog On “Ineffective Assistance,” The 3rd & 10th Cirs “Blow Out” Garland EOIR’s Inept Approach!

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

Dan Kowalski reports for LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca3-on-ineffective-assistance-saint-ford-ii#

https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/211729p1.pdf

https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/211729po.pdf

“The need for effective assistance of counsel applies in immigration law just as it does in criminal law. Aliens, many of whom do not speak English and some of whom are detained before their immigration hearings, can be particularly susceptible to the consequences of ineffective lawyers. Petitioner Arckange Saint Ford paid a lawyer to represent him in removal proceedings, but Saint Ford’s requests for relief from deportation were denied after the lawyer failed to present important and easily available evidence going to the heart of Saint Ford’s claims. Saint Ford retained new counsel, and his new lawyer asked the Board of Immigration Appeals to reopen his case because of his former attorney’s ineffective assistance. The Board declined to do so. Because Saint Ford presents a meritorious ineffective-assistance claim, we will vacate the Board’s decision and remand. … AMBRO, Circuit Judge, concurring Arckange Saint Ford will get a second shot at seeking withholding of removal—that’s what matters. The majority is remanding because of his former counsel’s deficient performance at Saint Ford’s removal hearing. I agree with that and concur in full. But former counsel was not the only one who made significant missteps at the hearing. The Immigration Judge did as well. I therefore would have granted Saint Ford’s initial petition for review and remanded on that basis. I write separately to explain these errors in the hope that similar ones will not be made at Saint Ford’s new hearing. [Emphasis added.]”

“The opinion and judgment filed on May 16, 2022 [34 F.4th 201 (3d Cir. 2022)] are hereby vacated. The Clerk is directed to file the amended opinion and re-enter the judgment contemporaneously with this order.” – Saint Ford v. Atty. Gen.

[Hats off again to Robert Andrew Painter!]

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

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010110752008.pdf

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/unpub-ca10-mtr-remand-singh-v-garland#

“Singh argues the BIA committed legal error in denying his motion to reopen because it failed to cite or apply the prejudice standard from Matter of Lozada and its progeny—i.e., that the alien “show a reasonable likelihood that the outcome would have been different,” Molina, 763 F.3d at 1263 (internal quotation marks omitted)— and instead applied an elevated standard of prejudice from Matter of F-S-N-, 28 I. & N. Dec. 1, 3 (B.I.A. 2020)—i.e., that the alien “overcome” a prior adverse credibility determination. We agree. … The BIA applied an incorrect legal standard in deciding whether Singh had been prejudiced by his attorney’s alleged ineffective assistance because it required him to “overcome” the adverse credibility determination to show prejudice. The BIA therefore abused its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen. See Qiu, 870 F.3d at 1202 (“[C]ommitting a legal error . . . is necessarily an abuse of discretion.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). On remand, the BIA should consider whether there is “a reasonable likelihood that the outcome would have been different but for counsel’s deficient performance.” Mena-Flores, 776 F.3d at 1169 (internal quotation marks omitted).”

[Hats off to Jessica K. Miles of El Paso!]

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

Wrong legal standards, mistakes at both trial and appellate levels, sloppy work, unfair results in “life or death” cases. Why is this “acceptable quasi-judicial performance” in the Biden Administration? Why isn’t Garland being held accountable for his life-threatening, ongoing, anti-due-process “clown show” @ EOIR?🤡☠️

EOIR Clown Show Must Go T-Shirt — “EOIR Clown Show Must Go” T-Shirt Custom Design Concept

“Lady Injustice” has found a home at Garland’s dysfunctional EOIR!
Public Realm

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-13-22

⚖️ HON. “SIR JEFFREY” CHASE ON LOZADA/INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL— Reviving My “Rivera Dissent,” While Highlighting More Than A Decade Of EOIR/DOJ Failure To Provide Effective Guidance!

https://www.jeffreyschase.com/blog/2022/10/11/amending-lozada

Amending Lozada?

October 11, 2022

In 1984, the Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington announced the standard for determining when the Constitution’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel requires the overturning of a criminal conviction due to ineffective assistance of counsel.1 Strickland involved a death penalty case; on its winding path to the Supreme Court, a circuit court panel found in the defendant’s favor. That ruling was later overturned; the defendant was executed two months after the Supreme Court’s decision established a standard that the defendant could not satisfy.

A commentator writing years later could find no record of a malpractice claim or disciplinary complaint of any type having been filed against the attorney impugned in that case.2 The commentator cited this example in making the point that attorneys who are found to be Constitutionally deficient in criminal defense cases very rarely face disciplinary complaints.3 And the standard for establishing ineffective assistance laid out in Strickland does not require the filing of any such complaint.4

By contrast, the requirements for claiming ineffective assistance of counsel in immigration proceedings were set forth by the Board of Immigration Appeals in its 1988 decision Matter of Lozada.5 As immigration proceedings are civil in nature, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel was found not to apply; the Board determined that a right to counsel in the removal context “is grounded in the fifth amendment guarantee of due process.”6The BIA thus created its own standard in Lozada that requires (1) filing an affidavit attesting to the relevant facts; (2) informing prior counsel of the allegations, and providing any response received; and (3) if claiming “a violation of ethical or legal responsibilities” by prior counsel, indicating “whether a complaint has been filed with appropriate disciplinary authorities regarding such representation, and if not, why not.”7

A practice advisory of the American Immigration Council points out that requirement number three “on its face…does not require filing a bar complaint in all circumstances.”8 The AIC advisory cites circuit decisions excusing the filing of disciplinary complaints, including Fadiga v. Att’y Gen., 488 F.3d 142, 156-57 (3d Cir. 2007) (allowing no bar complaint “where counsel acknowledged the ineffectiveness and made every effort to remedy the situation”), and Correa-Rivera v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1128, 1131-32 (9th Cir. 2013) (holding that Lozada only requires an explanation of whether a bar complaint was submitted, not proof that the complaint was filed).9

Nevertheless, a 1996 BIA precedent, Matter of Rivera,10 underscores the risk of not filing a bar complaint. In that case, the requirements of Lozada were satisfied. As to the third requirement, new counsel indicated that a disciplinary complaint was not filed against prior counsel because “if any error was made in this case it was a postal error or an error of inadvertence by [former counsel].”11 Although this explanation accorded with Lozada, as it was explained both whether a bar complaint was filed and why, the Board rejected the explanation as insufficient.

The majority opinion in Rivera went on to provide a list of reasons why it considered “[t]he requirement of a bar complaint” important in ineffective assistance claims. A dissenting opinion written by then-BIA chair Paul Schmidt addressed the issue far more sensibly:

I do not need a Lozada motion or a state bar complaint to find that ineffective assistance has occurred here. The respondent’s affidavit and that of former counsel are sufficient to establish that former counsel’s duties to the respondent were not properly discharged. There is no hint of collusion between former counsel and the respondent. Under these circumstances, I see no basis for making the filing of a state bar complaint the determinative factor…12

Thus, in Rivera (and in a subsequent precedent, Matter of Assaad,13 the Board reframed the need to file a disciplinary complaint as a categorical requirement under Lozada. But in its circumstance-specific approach, Judge Schmidt’s dissent raised the question of whether this requirement is really necessary.

Nearly six years after Rivera, the answer to that question came from an unlikely source. Matter of Lozada was briefly vacated in the final days of the Bush Administration by then Attorney General Michael Mukasey.14His decision reframed ineffective assistance claims from a due process right into a discretionary agency action, and in doing so, created a new, tougher standard for establishing ineffective assistance that far fewer respondents would be able to satisfy. But interestingly, the A.G.’s decision felt the need to rethink the Board’s disciplinary complaint requirement:

By making the actual filing of a bar complaint a prerequisite for obtaining (or even seeking) relief, it appears that Lozada may inadvertently have contributed to the filing of many unfounded or even frivolous complaints. See, e.g., Comment filed by the Committee on Immigration & Nationality Law, Association of the Bar of the City of New York (Sept. 29, 2008), in response to the Proposed Rule for Professional Conduct for Practitioners—Rules and Procedures, and Representation and Appearances, 73 Fed. Reg. 44,178 (July 30, 2008) (“Under the Lozada Rule, an ineffective assistance of counsel charge is often required in order to reopen a case or reverse or remand an unfavorable decision. The practice of filing such claims is rampant, and places well-intentioned and competent attorneys at risk of discipline.”). Such unfounded complaints impose costs on well-intentioned and competent attorneys, and make it harder for State bars to identify meritorious complaints in order to impose sanctions on lawyers whose performance is truly deficient. The new approach is intended to avoid these problems by requiring only that the [noncitizen] submit to the Board a completed and signed but unfiled complaint…15

In light of these concerns, the new Compean standard still required the preparation of a disciplinary complaint against prior counsel, but (perhaps in a bizarre nod to Moses E. Herzog) added that the respondent “need not actually file the complaint with the appropriate State bar or disciplinary authorities, as Lozada had required.”16

Less than five months after its issuance, Compean was vacated by Mukasey’s successor, Attorney General Eric Holder, thus restoring the Lozada standard, along with its mandatory bar requirement.17 Holder’s decision further directed EOIR to draft proposed regulations on the topic for public comment “as soon as practicable.”18

When the agency finally published those proposed regulations more than seven years later, they retained Rivera’s mandatory complaint requirement.19 In its comments to the proposed rule, the American Immigration Lawyers Association opined that the mandatory complaint requirement should be eliminated, stating that “rather than centering on attorney discipline, the rules governing ineffective assistance of counsel should focus on assisting and protecting the noncitizen victim…” The comment continued that “EOIR already has ample existing procedures to police the immigration bar without requiring the filing of a formal complaint.”20As no final rule was ever published, we don’t know EOIR’s reaction to the comment.

Another six years later, the question first raised in the Rivera dissent, and to which a Bush Administration Attorney General and leading bar groups seem in agreement on the answer, remains unresolved.Recently, immigration law experts have revived the issue.21As those experts again point out, the purpose of reopening a proceeding in which attorney error occurred is to remedy a harm that was beyond the respondent’s ability to control. The focus on correcting the harm (as opposed to punishing the lawyer) is why in the criminal context bar complaints rarely if ever accompany ineffective assistance claims. The lack of sucha requirement allows attorneys to admit to their occasional errors without fear of retribution.

In its unique approach to the contrary, the BIA discourages attorneys from being forthcoming about their errors, and further forces counsel to turn on their own colleagues for acts that would not warrant the extreme action of a bar complaint in any other context. It seems remarkable that even an Attorney General decision issued during the Bush Administration acknowledged that most bar complaints filed pursuant to Lozada are “unfounded” and “impose costs on well-intentioned and competent attorneys,” while also hampering state bars from identifying and disciplining genuine incidents of malpractice.

According to one proponent of amending the standard, attorney Rekha Sharma Crawford, the current Lozada requirement pits members of the private bar against one another in a very destructive way, and adds unnecessary stress on the immigration removal defense counsel who are often at the forefront of these claims-many which are meaningless and done only to comply with Lozada.22

Hopefully, this will be the year that the agency finally gets around to resolving this issue by removing the mandatory complaint requirement of Lozada, and thus bringing the standard in immigration proceedings into alignment with those required in other civil and criminal courts and tribunals.

Copyright 2022 Jeffrey S. Chase.All rights reserved.

Notes:

466 U.S. 668 (1984).

Joseph H. Ricks, Raising the Bar: Establishing an Effective Remedy against Ineffective Counsel, 2015 BYU L. Rev. 1115, 1120 (2016).

Id.

The Strickland standard requires a finding that (1) counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) there was a reasonable probability that the result would have been different if not for counsel’s inadequate performance.

19 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 1988).

Id. at 638.

Id. at 639.

American Immigration Council, Practice Advisory, “Seeking Remedies For Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in Immigration Cases,” (Jan. 2016), https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/seeking_remedies_for_ineffective_assistance_of_counsel_in_immigration_cases_practice_advisory.pdf, at 11.

Id.

10.21 I&N Dec. 599 (BIA 1996) (en banc).

11.Id. at 606.

12.Id. at 608. It bears noting that Judge Schmidt, and two of the three Board Members who joined in his dissent (Lory Rosenberg and Gustavo Villageliu) are presently members of the Round Table of Former Immigration Judges.

13.23 I&N Dec. 553 (BIA 2003).

14.Matter of Compean, Bangaly, & J-E-C-, 24 I&N Dec. 710 (A.G. Jan. 7, 2009).

15.Id. at 737-38.

16.Id. at 737. Moses E. Herzog, the fictional protagonist of Saul Bellow’s novel Herzog, authored numerous strongly-worded letters that he never sent.

17.Matter of Compean, Bangaly, & J-E-C-, 25 I&N Dec. 1 (A.G. June 3, 2009).

18.Id. at 2.

19.81 Fed. Reg. 49556, 49565 (July 28, 2016), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/07/28/2016-17540/motions-to-reopen-removal-deportation-or-exclusion-proceedings-based-upon-a-claim-of-ineffective.

20.Comment filed by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (Sept. 26, 2016), in response to the Proposed Rule for Motions Reopen Removal, Deportation, or Exclusion Proceedings Based Upon a Claim of Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, 81 Fed. Reg. 145 (July 28, 2016).

21.See, e.g., an October 3 AILA Roundtable, “Changing the Bench: A New Narrative on Lozada and Bar Complaints.”

22.Private email to the author.

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

Republished by permission.

As “Sir Jeffrey points out,” in Matter of Compean, Bangaly, & J-E-C-, 25 I&N Dec. 1 (A.G. June 3, 2009), AG Eric Holder directed EOIR to promulgate new regulations providing guidance on ineffective assistance of counsel. More than seven years later, in 2016 — essentially the entire Obama Administration — DOJ/EOIR issued flawed “proposed” regulations. Not surprisingly, no final regulations were ever issued. A dozen yers after the AG directed EOIR to take action — a big “nothingburger.”

This by no means is the only example of EOIR/DOJ’s unsuitability to the task facing it. It’s reminiscent of the tortured history of the “gender based asylum” regulations ordered by former AG, the late Janet Reno, but issued only as a badly flawed proposal and never finalized.

Additionally, incoming President Joe Biden made issuing “gender based regulations” one of his Administration’s highest priorities, ordering action by October 2021. A year later — nothing!

Meanwhile, EOIR Judges’ applications and interpretations of the governing precedent on gender-based asylum — Matter of A-R-G-G- — are wildly inconsistent. Beyond that, the 5th Circuit has taken the right-wing misogynistic “liberty” of simply ignoring the law on gender-based asylum.

“Lozada reform” is long overdue. But, so is meaningful EOIR reform!

Ultimately, America needs and deserves an independent U.S. Immigration Court with exceptionally well-qualified judges, at all levels, who are recognized experts in asylum law and unswervingly committed to due process and best judicial practices.

Until then, those appearing in Immigration Court — disproportionately individuals of color and women — and their hard-working attorneys — will continue to receive grossly substandard “justice” from “Justice!”

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-12-22

🏴‍☠️ HOW THE “ANYTHING GOES” IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT REGIME — ENABLED BY POOR QUASI-JUDICIAL & JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT — ERODES ALL OF OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES!

Eisha Jain on Lawfare:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/beyond-deportation

Border enforcement once again dominates contemporary immigration law debates. Yet many legal practices commonly linked to border control—including policing, relocation, and exclusion—actually have little to do with immigration enforcement. Instead, immigration control provides a justification for surveillance and the erosion of civil liberties deep inside the United States. For instance, the governor of Texas issued an executive order this June, asserting the legal authority to arrest people suspected of unlawfully crossing the border or committing “other violations of federal law.” This executive order is framed as being about expanding the pipeline to deportation and, in particular, shoring up federal efforts to promote border security. Yet the reach of the order goes well beyond issues relating to deportation. It raises the central questions: Who decides who appears to be present in the United States without lawful immigration status, and on what basis?

More recently, certain lawmakers have employed the rhetoric of border control to justify busing or flying migrants to locations inside the United States. Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) tweeted at the time: “We’re sending migrants to [Vice President Kamala Harris’s] backyard to call on the Biden Administration to do its job & secure the border.” Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) employed similar rhetoric to justify sending approximately 50 adults and children to Martha’s Vineyard without any apparent prior notice. This relocation may have violated criminal laws. The individuals who were relocated may have been given false information to induce them to board planes. Lawmakers who frame these relocations as a means of border control make the unjustified assumption that the targeted individuals had no claims to remain in the United States. This approach not only ignores laws permitting people to seek asylum but also treats certain U.S. residents as lacking basic civil liberties inside the United States. When government officials claim the ability to lure people from one state to another on false pretenses, they also claim virtually unlimited power to intrude on individual liberty in stated service of immigration control.

. . . .

In a variety of settings, ranging from politically motivated relocations of migrant communities to jailhouse immigration screenings, lawmakers present actions that curtail civil liberties as related to deportation. But a deportation-centric perspective, which centers whether and how certain practices might lead to removal, offers too limited a lens to understand the reach and impact of enforcement practices done in stated service of immigration control. It ignores the full costs of enforcement, including unjustified surveillance and policing. Rather than protecting the polity from a foreign threat, government actions purportedly aimed at immigration control undermine core liberties that ought to be protected within the American political community. If the ultimate aim of immigration law is to create an integrated political community, then we need to consider how law could operate to promote integration and inclusion, rather than treating all enforcement actions as a means to deportation.

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

Read the complete article of the link.

This is why it’s such a disgraceful mistake for Garland and the Biden Administration to allow the racially-charged, anti-due-process travesty at EOIR to continue, largely unabated! The misguided idea that migrants are not “real persons” under the Constitution — and to a large extent the related view that their lawyers aren’t entitled to the common professional treatment and courtesies extended in most other parts of our legal system — definitely has “carryover” into the dehumanization of various categories of the “other” and ignoring the compelling evidence of abuse amassed by those lawyers working to keep the system honest.

For example, the Supreme’s dismissive treatment of women’s rights and humanity is definitely related to the degrading treatment of women’s claims in Immigration Court — an overt misogyny encouraged by Sessions, Miller, and their nativist acolytes! That Democrats as a whole have failed to “pick up” on the serious attacks on equal justice and due process in Immigration Courts and their carryover effect to other parts of our legal system is a bad sign for the future of American democracy. Once a “person” is treated as “less than a full person” under the Constitution, there is no limit to who can become a “legal nonperson.”

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-10-22

🤮☠️ MORE THAN 100 ORGANIZATIONS (WHO, UNLIKE GARLAND, ACTUALLY PRACTICE BEFORE HIS DYSFUNCTIONAL “COURTS”) RIP GARLAND’S INSANE, DUE-PROCESS-DENYING “DEDICATED DOCKETS!”

Wheels are off at EOIR — The wheels are off and the wagon rotting away at EOIR!
PHOTO: Creative Commons

The undersigned 106 legal service providers, court observers, and allied organizations located in the cities where the Dedicated Docket now operates. Together, we have observed hundreds of cases on the Dedicated Docket throughout the country. Our collective experience reveals a process rife with unfairness: lack of legal representation, expedited and arbitrary timelines, removal orders against pro se respondents (including young children), as well as courts marked by confusion and in some cases hostility.

Here’s the letter/report:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/outsidenews/posts/groups-detail-grave-concerns-to-garland-re-dedicated-docket

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

What’s going on here!? As due process and equal justice are trashed, and lives and futures endangered, some of the best legal minds in America are forced to spend time pointing out the obvious to our “disconnected from reality” AG! What a waste!

This inexcusable disaster was totally predictable in advance! NO expert recommended this stupid, “sure to fail” “haste makes waste” approach to asylum in a faux “court system” already reeling from bias, management incompetence, hostility to due process, worst practices, far too many poorly qualified judges (some selected by Sessions and Barr for their perceived willingness to “railroad” asylum seekers), a notoriously anti-asylum appeals board, and rock bottom morale! Yet, Garland went ahead!

And NOBODY among his subordinates — not DAG Lisa Monaco, not AAG Vanita Gupta, not AAG/Civil Rights Kristen Clarke, not SG Elizabeth Prolager — at the DOJ had the guts to stand up and JUST SAY NO to his life-threatening nonsense. They all share the blame for this completely avoidable blot on our justice system and on their records (something progressives should remember when these irresponsible folks show up looking for jobs someday, as they inevitably will). What a disgrace! It didn’t have to be this way!

Why isn’t practice before the Immigration Courts and demonstrated commitment to human rights and due process a MINIMUM requirement for being the Attorney General or a top DOJ official in a Democratic Administration? No more “ivory tower” “tone deaf” appointments to key justice jobs from Democrats! End the deadly, wasteful nonsense! How many more innocents will be abused and systemically denied fundamental justice by EOIR before Biden and Harris pay attention to what’s happening “on their watch?”

And, folks, don’t forget the almost unfathomable “system costs” of having the knowledge, creativity, energy, and resources of these 106 organizations tied up in resisting and publicizing Garland’s stupidity and disdain by for equal justice and racial justice in America! They should be running EOIR, issuing great precedents on the BIA, solving problems in a practical, humane, legal manner as Immigration Judges, and redoing the broken and dysfunctional administrative system at EOIR.

The knowledge, personnel, creativity, and courage to establish a “model due process court system” are available “out here” — in spades. Instead, this avoidable human rights and racial injustice disaster is inflicted on our nation and some of the must vulnerable therein, by a tone-deaf Democratic Administration unwilling or unable to live up to their campaign promises! Disgusting! 🤮

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-06-22

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and Georgetown University Announce 2023 “Legacy of a Dream” Awardee

From Paula:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Here’s the latest analysis of Garland’s ongoing abuse of his office from Austin Kocher, PhD, at TRAC:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Here it is “Time for a Child Welfare Approach to Cancellation of Removal:”

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

From Dan Kowalski @ LexisNexis Immigration Community:

Commentary from Kevin A. Gregg, ESQ:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Apply now! Ask questions later!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Alexandra Villarreal reports for The Guardian:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

71% of Immigrants Win Their Cases Thanks to Pro Bono Volunteers with the Immigration Justice Campaign

Posted by Atenas Burrola Estrada | Oct 27, 2022 | Due Process & the Courts, Immigration Courts

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

I received this from a practitioner in response my earlier post about Garland’s ongoing scheduling and due process fiasco @ EOIR:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

By Paul Wickham Schmidt

Courtside Special

Oct. 26, 2022

“Due process cannot exist if an attorney does not have sufficient time and advance notice to prepare for a case.”

Here’s a copy of the letter, as sent:

🇺🇸“Due Process Forever!”

Related posts:

From Politico:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Dan Kowalski reports for LexisNexis Immigration Community:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Eisha Jain on Lawfare:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Here’s the letter/report:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts: