🗽COURTSIDE’S INSTANT ANALYSIS: BIDEN’S PROPOSED ASYLUM REGS: Advocates Beware! ⚠️☹️ — Despite A Potentially Workable Framework, Administration’s Inconsistency On Human Rights, Lack Of Realistic Implementation Plan Led By Progressive Asylum Experts, Absence Of EOIR Judges Qualified To Fairly & Efficiently Decide Asylum Cases, & A BIA Completely Unsuited To Establishing Favorable Asylum Precedents & Holding “Asylum Deniers Club” Accountable Likely To Derail System In Practice & Lead To Further Chaos & Injustice 🏴‍☠️ — You Don’t Entrust “The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight” With A New Program That Requires “Expert Marksmanship” To Succeed! — “Casey” Remains Perplexed By The Biden Administration, Particularly Garland!

Garland’s Unwillingness To Install Progressive Competence @ EOIR Continues to Drag Down the Ship Of State!
PHOTO: Thomas Hawk
Creative Commons
Amateur Night

Here’s a link to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, courtesy of Dan Kowalski over at LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2021-17779.pdf

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

And, here’s my “quick take:”

At first glance, this could potentially be a workable system, with some favorable aspects:

* Restores properly generous credible fear standard;

* Allows AO to grant well-established cases in first instance, even at the credible fear level, without referral to EOIR;

* Retains EOIR review of both credible fear and asylum denials;

* Doesn’t appear to affect pending and affirmative cases;

* Retains access to Circuit review of denials.

But, as with most things, the devil 👹 is in the details. And, personnel, leadership, direction, and accountability are absolute keys to success.

Without:

1) More and better Asylum Officers;

2) Far better training at the AO and EOIR (see, Michele Pistone);

3) Better IJs with proven expertise in asylum law and a demonstrated willingness to grant relief to worthy cases;

4) An entirely new BIA of progressive asylum experts to provide leadership, positive precedents, and accountability for both credible fear reviews and de novo asylum reviews;

5) An agreement with the private bar as to where and on what schedule these cases are to be heard, to achieve universal representation (see, Michele Pistone and VIISTA); and

6) Agreements with NGOs re housing, care, employment assistance to take pressure off particular communities;

this proposal appears to be “headed for failure.”

I can’t glean any of those essential characteristics from this NPR.

In their absence:

1) There are likely to be huge discrepancies in AO decisions;

2) Many current IJs, particularly from border areas, will simply “rubber stamp” both credible fear and asylum merits denials from the AO to keep the EOIR dockets moving and “make quota” (Lucas Guttentag, where are you?);

3) “Rubber stamping” of asylum denials is also endemic at the BIA, as currently comprised;

3) The current BIA will be reluctant to issue positive asylum precedents (not sure they even know how or have the ability to do so) and will likely concentrate on instructing AOs and the IJs on how to deny asylum or credible fear and have it stand up on review;

4) The private bar will be unable to keep up with the pro bono demand, causing many applicants to be unrepresented or underrepresented;

5) Asylum applicants will be concentrated in particular communities, often near the border, who will complain about the burdens being inflicted upon them by the Feds.

In other words, without better, expert, progressive leadership at both DHS and DOJ, and without major changes in personnel and training, this program will rapidly become a disaster, like other “streamlining” efforts that do not deal realistically with the practical aspects of implementation, particularly the qualifications, attitude, “culture,” and training of those making the actual decisions! A continuing lack of progressive leadership and expertise at the “retail level” will likely lead to widespread injustice, inconsistency, and eventually protracted litigation.

I am also concerned that the NPR appears to take the current 1.4 million case EOIR backlog (actually under-stated in the NPR as 1.3 million — Garland has grown it almost as rapidly as Barr-Sessions) as a “given.” But, there are readily available ways to dramatically slash this backlog by perhaps as much as 90% (see, Chen & Moskowitz plan) which would allow both IJs and the BIA to work on these cases “in real time” WITHOUT creating yet more “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” at EOIR (as the NPR, without the changes outlined above, is highly likely to do).

Casey Stengel — “Like the rest of us, Casey has no idea what Judge Garland is doing and what he hopes to achieve in his Star Chambers!”
PHOTO: Rudi Reit
Creative Commons

This leads me to reiterate Casey’s cosmic question: “Can’t anybody here play this game?” Ironically, there are many “all-star players” out here in the real world who can and would be “winners.” But, for whatever reason, to date, this Administration has unwisely chosen to leave most of them “on the sidelines” rather than giving them bats and gloves and putting them in the game. ⚾️ That’s painfully obvious at DOJ! Not a recipe for a “winning campaign” in my “preseason prediction.”

🇺🇸DPF,

Best,

PWS

08-18-21

👨🏽‍⚖️⚖️BIDEN NOMINATES HON. DAVID ESTUDILLO, FORMER IMMIGRATION/HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYER FOR US DISTRICT JUDGE , WD WA! — The Daily Kos Reports

President Biden’s judicial nominees continue to maintain a truer representation of America. Judge David Estudillo, nominated for the Western District of Washington, would be only the second Latino judge to ever serve on that court. Confirming Judge Estudillo moves us toward a future where all people see themselves reflected on the federal bench. Can you help us urge the Senate to confirm Judge Estudillo?

Sign and send if you agree: Confirming Judge Estudillo would be a huge win for immigrants’ rights. Our senators must vote without delay!.

SIGN AND SEND THE PETITION
Judge Estudillo has served as a state court judge on the Grant County Superior Court in Washington for six years. He previously operated his own law firm for 10 years where he represented people seeking asylum, DACA protections, work authorizations, temporary protected status, and citizenship.

His personal and professional experience would bring an important voice to a district that represents more than 1.1 million immigrants and nearly 1 million Latinx people. We must urge the Senate to confirm Judge Estudillo.

Sign and send the petition to your U.S. senators: Confirm Judge David Estudillo!

SIGN AND SEND THE PETITION
Thanks for all you do,
Erin Tulley, Daily Kos

P.S. Below is an email we sent out earlier urging the Senate to confirm Judge Estudillo:

Paul, sign and send to your U.S. senators: Vote yes on Judge David Estudillo for the Western District of Washington.

SIGN AND SEND THE PETITION
On July 15, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to advance a number of Biden’s judicial nominees who will help restore integrity and fairness to the federal bench after Trump’s devastating conservative overhaul of our courts.

Judge David Estudillo is one of the nominees the committee advanced and one of three nominees currently pending on the Senate floor for the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

Sign and send if you agree: Confirming Judge Estudillo would be a huge win for immigrants’ rights. Our senators must vote without delay!

SIGN AND SEND THE PETITION
Judge Estudillo’s parents were farmworkers who immigrated to the U.S. from Mexico. If confirmed, he would be the second Latino judge ever to serve on this court. It is crucial that the more than 1.1 million immigrants and nearly 1 million Latinx people in Washington feel that they are represented on the courts by people who share their experiences and identities.

Even if you don’t live in Washington, we can all agree that confirming civil rights lawyers to our courts benefits every single person in the country. Confirming Judge Davis Estudillo moves us toward a future where all people see themselves reflected on the federal bench.

Sign and send the petition to your U.S. senators: Confirm Judge David Estudillo!

SIGN AND SEND THE PETITION
In solidarity,
Sarah Hogg, Daily Kos

Daily Kos Relies on Readers Like You

We don’t have billionaire backers like some right-wing media outlets. Half our revenue comes from readers like you, meaning we literally couldn’t do this work without you. Can you chip in $5 right now to help Daily Kos keep fighting?

Chip in $5

If you wish to donate by mail instead, please send a check to Daily Kos, PO Box 70036, Oakland, CA, 94612. Contributions to Daily Kos are not tax deductible.

Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from Daily Kos, please click here.

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

As I always say: “Better Judges for a better America!” This a step forward, although we still have a long way to go to repair the extensive damage inflicted on the Federal Judiciary by Trump & McConnell.

Moreover, as I will discuss below, one of America’s most important (and readily “improvable”) judiciaries, one completely controlled by the Biden Administration, the U.S. Immigration Court, has actually taken steps backward in terms of progressive appointments under Garland. It’s like a new coach taking over in the 4th quarter of a game his team is losing 48-7 and saying “OK, let’s spot them another 17 points before we start playing to win!” Incredible, yet, sadly, true!

As the latest census shows an increasingly diverse America, the Article III Federal Judiciary remains an embarrassing backwater of “non-diversity.” This was intentionally aggravated by Trump & McConnell who, as noted above, elevated primarily White ultra right wing men, many with thin or questionable qualifications, to the Federal Bench!

As stated above:

It is crucial that the more than 1.1 million immigrants and nearly 1 million Latinx people in Washington feel that they are represented on the courts by people who share their experiences and identities.

Evidently, AG Merrick Garland and his team @ DOJ haven’t gotten that message. So far, Garland’s appointments to the Immigration Court, and the composition of his BIA, look more like Stephen Miller’s, Billy Barr’s, and Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions’s “skewed whitewashed vision” of America than they do the real America. That’s particularly true when you consider the American communities whose lives and futures are existentially affected (primarily adversely) by substandard and biased EOIR decisions that continue to be cranked out under Garland. This is despite a few moves by Garland to “kill off” the most horrible of the many bad precedents cranked out by the AG and the BIA during the Trump regime.

Judge Estrada sounds like just the type of individual that Garland should be appointing to the U.S. Immigration Court and the BIA. Compare Judge Estrada’s experience, qualifications, and “real life” background and human engagement with the lackluster profiles of Immigration Judges recently appointed by Garland and with many of those appointed to the Immigration Court and the BIA over the past two decades.

There are plenty of diverse, extraordinarily talented, courageous, practical experts out there in the NDPA to reform and improve the EOIR Judiciary at all levels! Many haven’t applied in the past (or have had their applicants rejected in favor of lesser-qualified candidates) because of the White Nationalist, xenophobic, nativist tone set by Sessions and Barr. Indeed, I spoke over the weekend to one of the leading progressive immigration/human rights experts in America who felt that way. Obviously, I encouraged that “NDPA superstar” to submit the applications — not just for EOIR but also for the Article III Judiciary which also needs to get its act together on human rights, immigration, and racial justice.

Garland & team need to reform and improve the selection criteria, involve outside expert input, and then actively recruit the “best and the brightest” from the NDPA to remake and elevate the Immigration Judiciary! As I have mentioned before, my colleagues in the Round Table and I have done more outreach, cajoling, inspiring, and recruiting among the progressive immigration and human rights community to apply for EOIR jobs than have those at DOJ and elsewhere in the Administration whose job it should be to do just that! It’s ridiculous, and it’s wrong!

No wonder things continue to be an ungodly mess at EOIR despite mountains of blueprints, action plans, and other readily achievable reform recommendations and proposed improvements produced by practical experts in the immigration/human rights/racial justice community! The Immigration Judiciary cries out for diverse, progressive, talented, practical scholar “role models” drawn from the NDPA!

Lucas Guttentag, are you listening somewhere out there? Don’t get co-opted by the DOJ bureaucracy that overall failed to stand up to Trump and his gang of insurrectionists! Don’t let the new leadership at DOJ “de-prioritize or back burner” essential, long overdue, achievable EOIR reforms! Expose “Obamathink revolution by evolution” as the ridiculous and dangerous nonsense that it is (and always was)! Fight for your ideals, speak out, and shake up this disastrously broken and unfair system with the progressive change we need! At this point in your distinguished career, what do you have to lose? Those who consciously chose “not to rock the boat” at EOIR in the past, when human lives, due process, and human dignity were at stake, now share in the responsibility for its sinking!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-16-21

🤮⚖️ NO JUSTICE @ “JUSTICE,” AS “DENIAL CULTURE” CONTINUES @ EOIR: 8TH CIR. BONKS BIA FOR FAILING TO FOLLOW PRECEDENT: Their Own & Circuit — Issue: Continuance for U Visa Application — Gonzales Chechaluno v. Garland!

Dan Kowalski reports on LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca8-on-continuances-gonzales-chechaluno-v-garland#

Gonzales Chechaluno v. Garland

“In sum, we conclude that the BIA abused its discretion in two respects: it departed from established policy when it failed either to apply the Sanchez Sosa factors or to remand to allow the IJ do so, and it failed to provide a rational explanation for its decision, including its treatment of this court’s binding precedent in Caballero-Martinez. … We grant the petition for review, vacate the BIA’s May 2020 order, and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

[Hats off to David L. Wilson and amici Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota, ASISTA Immigration Assistance Project and National Network To End Domestic Violence!]

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

Folks, all of this nonsense, delay, needless litigation, and remarkable legal/judicial incompetence was for the “purpose” of denying a well-deserved continuance to a U visa applicant — what should have been about a 5-minute positive adjudication, at max. No wonder the Federal Courts are clogged, the EOIR backlog grows, and the system has lost all respect and credibility!

I wish that Lucas Guttentag, Lisa Monaco, Vanita Gupta, and Merrick Garland would explain to all of us what is the purpose of an “expert tribunal” that lacks expertise, fundamental legal skills, judicial independence, moral courage, and common sense, as well as the backbone to have stood up to folks like Sessions and Barr (see, e.g., the Census Bureau career civil servants for stark contrast).

EOIR needs, among other things, changes at the top, real courageous progressive leadership, and a new, well-qualified, progressive, practical, expert BIA that puts due process and fair adjudication above all else. The practical experts are out there! Lucas knows exactly who should be leaders, role models, and appellate judges at the BIA! He knows that EOIR is the one critically important Federal Judiciary that can be transformed in the short run into a progressive, due-process-focused, “model judiciary!” Every day wasted in making the necessary changes in personnel and procedures is a life-changing, life-preserving opportunity wasted!

So, what’s the delay? Why is this nonsense, injustice, and waste of resources continuing nearly seven months into the Biden Administration? What’s with the continuing, due-process-denying, corner-cutting, sophomoric “denial quotas” for EOIR “judges” that produce wasteful, unjust “garbage adjudications” like this litigation exemplifies?

Lucas Guttentag
Senior Counselor to the Deputy Attorney General

It shouldn’t be this hard to get long, long overdue, well-documented, common sense, readily achievable changes at EOIR! It shouldn’t be this hard for asylum seekers and other migrants, as well as their long-suffering representatives, to get the due process and fair and impartial adjudication that is their absolute right under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to our Constitution!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-14-21

😎👍🏼GOOD NEWS @ JUSTICE, EVEN AS LATEST REPORT SHOWS MASSISIVE FAILURE 👎🏽🤮 @ EOIR! — Poor Judging, Politicized Practices, Unhelpful Precedents, Uncontrollable Backlogs, Lousy Technology — Can Lucas Guttentag, New Senior Counselor To DAG Lisa Monaco Get Garland, Monaco, & Gupta To Make The Personnel Changes & Other Long-Overdue Progressive Reforms Necessary To Save This System From Collapse? — “”How can you have a fair game when the referee is unfair,” Asks Asylum Expert Professor Karen Musalo!

Dean Kevin Johnson reports for ImmigrationProf Blog:

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2021/08/immigration-law-professor-named-senior-counselor-on-immigration-policy-in-bidens-justice-department.html

Immigration Law Professor Named Senior Counselor on Immigration Policy in Biden’s Justice Department

Monday, August 2, 2021

By Immigration Prof

Good immigration news from Washington D.C.!Immigration law professor Lucas Guttentag has been named senior counselor on immigration policy and report to the Department of Justice’s Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. Guttantag served in the Obama administration as a senior adviser on immigration policy, including as senior counselor to the secretary of Homeland Security.Anita Kumar for Politico states that “Guttentag will not only help dismantle Trump-era policies but will coordinate Biden policy among various agencies and departments.”

Kumar writes that “[p]rior to entering the administration, Guttentag served as law professor at Stanford Law School and lecturer at Yale Law School. He launched the Immigration Policy Tracking Project in 2017 to develop and maintain a complete record of Trump administration immigration actions.

In total, Trump made more than 400 alterations to immigration policy during his time in office, according to the Migration Policy Institute, a think tank with staffers across the political spectrum that provides data and analysis on immigration policy. The Immigration Policy Tracking Project put that number closer to 1,000.”

KJ

Current Affairs | Permalink

Comments

Post a comment

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

Meanwhile, Tyche Hendricks reports @ KQED News on the ongoing mess @ EOIR:

https://www.kqed.org/news/11883227/backlogged-immigration-courts-could-get-help-from-biden-plan-but-some-want-a-total-overhaul

If you are an immigrant requesting asylum or fighting deportation before the federal immigration court in San Francisco, it’s likely to take nearly three years for your case to be resolved — the average processing time, as of June, was 1,057 days.

That’s because the San Francisco court’s 26 judges are working their way through close to 76,000 cases — the third highest number of pending cases in the country, after New York and Miami. Nationwide, the backlog has grown to an unprecedented 1.3 million cases, more than twice what it was when President Donald Trump took office.

What’s at stake, says Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute in Washington DC, is the credibility of the entire immigration system — both for the individuals whose futures are on the line, and for broader public confidence.

. . . .

The epic case backlog results from a convergence of factors.

Immigration enforcement, which had increased under President Barack Obama, ballooned during the presidency of Donald Trump. Trump ended Obama-era prosecution priorities that focused on immigrants with serious criminal histories, and instead pursued deportation of any undocumented immigrant. As of last December, more than 98% of the cases in immigration court were for people whose only charge was an immigration violation, according to an analysis by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.

Also in the past several years, a much larger share of the migrants arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border are people requesting asylum, rather than trying to evade border authorities to come work or join family in the U.S. And if migrants can establish a “credible fear” of persecution in a screening interview with an asylum officer, they can’t be quickly removed from the country. Instead, their cases go straight into the immigration court system.

RELATED STORIES

US to Expedite Immigration Cases of Families Arriving at Southern Border

Immigration Court Fees Set to Jump Dramatically Unless Judge Intervenes

San Francisco DA Joins Calls to Release ICE Detainees During Pandemic

But that court system is chronically underfunded, with not enough judges or support staff, according to a 2019 report by the American Bar Association. While the Trump administration hired more judges and imposed a case completion quota on judges meant to speed up their work, neither made a dent in the backlog. Meanwhile the ABA report found that hiring practices became politicized and the administration’s policies threatened due process.

On top of all of that came the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to months of closed courts, suspended hearings and delayed processing.

While many state and federal courts moved quickly to conduct hearings over video conference calls, the Executive Office of Immigration Review, as the immigration court system is known, was behind the curve, according to longtime San Francisco immigration judge, Dana Leigh Marks, who is the executive vice president of the National Association of Immigration Judges.

“What the pandemic and quarantine restrictions revealed is just how abysmally prepared EOIR has been from the technology aspect,” said Marks, speaking in her role with the NAIJ, the judge’s union. “And we do not have universal electronic filing… so there’s roughly a million cases or more that are still paper-based. And that really makes hearings from a judge’s home much more problematic.”

. . . .

Advocates for asylum seekers are also looking forward to seeing new regulations from the Biden administration in another area: establishing clear eligibility standards for asylum so as to prevent future instances where an attorney general can override decades of case law, as Sessions did in the case of a Salvadoran woman fleeing domestic violence, known as the Matter of A-B-.

Karen Musalo, director of the Center on Gender and Refugee Studies at UC Hastings in San Francisco, said she was relieved when Garland reversed that ruling in June, but she called that just a first step in restoring fairness to the asylum system.

“What is much more important is asylum regulations that specifically look at aligning U.S. law with international norms,” she said. “We need to get the law back on track.”

‘What is much more important is asylum regulations that specifically look at aligning U.S. law with international norms. We need to get the law back on track.’Karen Musalo, Center on Gender and Refugee Studies at UC Hastings

That regulation is being drafted jointly by the departments of Justice and Homeland Security and is expected by late October, she said.

Musalo also called on the Biden administration to improve training and oversight for immigration judges, who are appointed to the bench by the U.S. attorney general. The fact that asylum grant rates vary wildly between judges suggests that rulings can be influenced by political leanings more than an impartial application of the law, she said.

“You could have very good rules and laws, but if you don’t have fair, unbiased, competent, professional individuals applying the rules in the law, you don’t solve the problems,” she said. “How can you have a fair game when the referee is unfair?”

. . . .

Legal organizations including the American Bar Association, the American Immigration Lawyers Association and NAIJ, the judges’ union, have long called on Congress to overhaul the immigration courts by taking them out of the Department of Justice altogether. And this summer there’s a move to do just that.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, the chair of the House immigration subcommittee, will soon introduce a bill to make the immigration court system a so-called Article I court, akin to federal tax court or bankruptcy court. Staff involved in drafting the bill say the new system would better protect due process of law and would be shielded from political pressure from presidents, be they Democratic or Republican.

Some observers, including Meissner and Musalo, say such a change is needed but they aren’t convinced the bill could win enough support to pass.

But Marks, the immigration judge, says the current dysfunction shows how badly the immigration courts are compromised and how urgently they need independence from the Department of Justice.

“It’s an uncomfortable and inappropriate placement for a neutral court system. And that’s the inherent structural flaw that we need Congress to fix,” she said. “I really feel like it is an idea whose time has come… now.”

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

You can read Tyche’s complete article at the link.

With deep experience in advocacy, Government, academics, senior management, and scholarship, Lucas is definitely the person for this job! A proven problem solver, to be sure! Many congrats, Lucas! Your appointment is like a breath of fresh air at what has been a mostly “stale show” at Justice so far!

Nevertheless, as Professor Karen Musalo cogently points out, without better judges and leaders at EOIR — high caliber, proven progressive experts “in the Guttentag-Musalo mold,” — any favorable regulatory or even legislative changes will likely founder. As currently staffed and led, EOIR simply lacks the expertise, independence, moral/intellectual leadership, courage, and “judicial firepower” to achieve a progressive, practical, due-process-compliant immigration and human rights system. Due process, fundamental fairness, and a correct application of U.S. asylum law — one that honors Cardoza-Fonseca and Mogharrabi — can only be realized by replacing “Club Denial @ EOIR” — actively encouraged and promoted by Sessions and Barr, with competent, expert, progressive judges committed to fair and humane treatment of asylum seekers and other migrants under law.

Simply adding more judges to an incredibly broken system, without correcting the legal, personnel, and judicial administration issues that led to this massive (largely self-created) dysfunction will not solve the problem! Lucas knows this as well as anyone! So does Judge Dana Marks, who actually litigated and won the landmark “well-founded fear” case INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca before the Supremes!

Hon. Diana Leigh Marks — Hon. Dana Leigh Marks
U.S. Immigration Judge
San Francisco Immigration Court
Past President, National Association of Immigration Judges

But even with experts like Lucas at DOJ, Ur Jaddou, John Trasvina, and Judge Ashley Tabaddor in place at DHS, it’s going to take a huge additional infusion of progressive expertise at EOIR, DHS, HHS, and throughout Government to get immigration and refugee policy under control.

GOP Administrations have proved willing to make the bold, often-criticized personnel and policy moves necessary to carry out a nativist, restrictionist, anti-immigrant agenda. Their “response” to criticism has basically been: “We’re in power, you’re not! So, go pound sand!”

Will the Biden Administration “break the Dem mold” and be bold and visionary enough to make the available, necessary, yet potentially controversial, moves to restore and improve due process and efficiency to the Government immigration bureaucracy? Will Lucas finally be able to get Team Garland to see and realize the cosmic importance of developing a progressive Immigration Judiciary: One that will eventually provide the “Article III ready” judicial candidates who will bring balance and quality to the Article III system perverted by four years of Trump-McConnell extremest right-wing, ideological, far out of the mainstream, judicial picks? Contrary to the timid, ineffective, ultimately destructive Obama Administration approach, EOIR is “a boat that needs to be rocked” — big time!

It’s an ambitious task to be sure. But, those with the vision and courage to accomplish it might well go down in history as the saviors of American democracy. It’s that important!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-03-21

⚖️TAL @ SF CHRON GETS ACTION ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT @ EOIR & REST OF DOJ! — Report on Problems In Immigration Courts Finally Spurs Positive Response! — But Biden Continues To Flail Around Unnecessarily On Restoring Asylum & The Rule Of Law At Our Borders! — Where Is The Enlightened Progressive Leadership We Need?

Tal Kopan
Washington Reporter, SF Chronicle

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Justice-Department-to-overhaul-its-sexual-16352255.php

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice will examine its sexual harassment policies for potential reform, a move that comes after The Chronicle’s reporting on inappropriate behavior in the immigration courts, according to an announcement obtained by the newspaper.

The announcement went out to all department staff Thursday in an email seen by The Chronicle. In it, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco wrote it was “critical to our duty as principled defenders of the law to combat sexual harassment and misconduct in our own workplace and hold offenders accountable for their actions.”

Monaco said she is forming a committee to review all sexual harassment policies of the many sub-agencies of the Justice Department and assess where they may need to be changed, as well as evaluate current training and education. Two senior officials from her office will chair the effort and include members from across the department, and she said she wanted results of the review in six months.

. . . .

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

Thanks, and congrats, Tal! Those with access can read the rest of Tal’s report at the link.

How very timely! I just got done posting an article about the need for better Immigration Judges. https://immigrationcourtside.com/2021/07/30/%e2%9a%96%ef%b8%8f%f0%9f%a7%91%f0%9f%8f%bd%e2%80%8d%e2%9a%96%ef%b8%8f-why-better-immigration-judges-matter-new-study-shows-that-who-your-judge-is-where-he-or-she-is-located-what-administ/

Not surprisingly, according to the research, the fairest Immigration Judges for asylum applicants and other migrants “profile” as female, with immigration experience, in the 9th Circuit, in a Dem Administration. Not exactly the Sessions, Barr, Garland (to date) judicial profile. That could have something to do with these festering problems at EOIR that haven’t been dealt with despite numerous warning signs and “alerts.”

Also, the Garland DOJ would do well to investigate and correct the effects of the virulent misogyny directed at female refugees of color by Sessions, Barr, and their toadies and furthered by EOIR policies, procedures, and precedents over the past four years. Endemic problems don’t happen by chance!

According to the Ryo-Peacock study I posted, the “difference” that better Immigration Judges could make is over 200,000 lives potentially saved or altered for the better. That’s not exactly “chump change,” particularly when the interests of family members, employers, communities, our larger justice system, and our overall society are considered.

It also calls into question the apparent lack of seriousness with which “Team Garland” has taken Immigration Judge appointments to date. Throwing dozens of “not the best qualified available” IJs — without any concerted recruitment or diversification efforts — into an already broken, biased, and reeling system that deals with human lives in a cavalier manner is NOT GOOD POLICY! Particularly when the chronic problems of bad judging at EOIR had been clearly and articulately identified and many viable action plans and reform programs had been set forth by private sector experts even before the 2020 election.

EOIR needs new progressive leadership, a new progressive expert BIA that will truly be the “Supreme Court” of immigration and human rights, and better qualified and more diverse Immigration Judges who finally will implement the noble and correct vision of “through teamwork and innovation, being the world’s best tribunals guaranteeing fairness and due process for all!” That would include treating all individuals coming before the courts, staff, and colleagues with dignity, respect, and fairness.

Sadly, the Biden Administration’s immigration policies, whatever they are on any particular day and place, seem to be mired in confusion, questionable competence, and a barrage of largely meaningless and confusing bureaucratic doublespeak. Meanwhile, in reality, it appears that Central Americans, Haitians, and others are being returned to danger zones without any process in place to insure fair treatment. Certainly, “Title 42” is the equivalent of no process whatsoever. While “expedited removal” might have the potential to be used fairly, there is little reason to believe that it is now being fairly and professionally administered by anyone committed to fundamental fairness over expedient enforcement.

Yes, Garland has sued racist moron Gov. Greg Abbott on his illegal Trumpist grandstanding (like Texas doesn’t have real problems to solve?). Stunts like Abbott’s were entirely predictable. However, if the Biden Administration had “hit the ground running” on asylum, the issue might well have been put to bed by now, and Abbott might have to focus instead on his normal job of mis-governing Texas, rather than focusing attention elsewhere.

The Administration could and should have had a robust refugee system up and running in the Northern Triangle that would reduce border pressure, a functioning asylum system that would encourage asylum applicants to apply at ports of entry rather than seeking irregular entry, a professional screening program in place at DHS, and a relatively “backlog free” Immigration Court, led by a progressive BIA, providing positive guidance on cases that could be granted. They would also have resettlement agreements and programs in place with NGOs and legal service groups to appropriately represent and resettle those granted asylum and those in the process to the locations where they could best reside.

Fair, expert, courageous leadership, leadership with a humane, positive, practical vision of immigration and an unswerving commitment to fairly granting asylum, is critical to success on immigration, human rights, and racial justice issues. So far, nobody in the Biden Administration appears to fit the bill! That’s probably why the Administration’s confused and ever-vacillating policies are being blasted by both progressives and reactionaries — the worst of all political worlds, as I have observed before!

There are experts out here in the private sector with the vision and leadership ability to solve these problems while putting White Nationalist restrictionists like Abbott in their place. Even though it’s late, the Biden Administration still needs to get a better team in place and let them solve the problems with knowledge, competence, and compassion, not more “knee-jerk reactions” and continuations of the cruel, inhumane, counterproductive, and often illegal policies and practices of the Trump regime.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-31-21

⚖️🧑🏽‍⚖️ WHY BETTER IMMIGRATION JUDGES MATTER — New Study Shows That Who Your Judge Is, Where He Or she Is Located, & What Administration Is In Power Makes A Big Difference In Favorable Outcomes For Migrants — Even Universal Representation Might Not Be Able To Overcome Bad Judging At EOIR!

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3885995

Represented But Unequal: The Contingent Effect of Legal Representation in Removal Proceedings

Law & Society Review

63 Pages Posted: 15 Jul 2021

Emily Ryo

University of Southern California Gould School of Law

Ian Peacock

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)

Date Written: July 13, 2021

Abstract

Substantial research and policymaking have focused on the importance of lawyers in ensuring access to civil justice. But do lawyers matter more in cases decided by certain types of judges than others? Do lawyers matter more in certain political, legal, and organizational contexts than others? We explore these questions by investigating removal proceedings in the United States—a court process in which immigration judges decide whether to admit noncitizens into the United States or deport them. Drawing on over 1.9 million removal proceedings decided between 1998 and 2020, we examine whether the representation effect (the increased probability of a favorable outcome associated with legal representation) depends on judge characteristics and contextual factors. We find that the representation effect is larger among female (than male) judges and among more experienced judges. In addition, the representation effect is larger during Democratic presidential administrations, in immigration courts located in the Ninth Circuit, and in times of increasing caseload. These findings suggest that the representation effect depends on who the judge is and their decisional environment, and that increasing noncitzens’ access to counsel—even of high quality—might be insufficient under current circumstances to ensure fair and consistent outcomes in immigration courts.

Keywords: access to justice, immigration courts, removal proceedings, judicial decisionmaking

Suggested Citation:

Ryo, Emily and Peacock, Ian, Represented But Unequal: The Contingent Effect of Legal Representation in Removal Proceedings (July 13, 2021). Law & Society Review, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3885995

Download This Paper

Open PDF in Browser

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

Some things to consider:

Sessions and Barr appointed over half of the current approximately 550 U.S. Immigration Judges;
Many of those appointed had little or no immigration experience — almost none had actual experience representing asylum seekers or any other migrants in Immigration Court;
With 27 IJ appointments since taking office, AG Garland now has appointed approximately 5% of the Immigration Judiciary;
Only one of Garland’s first 27 appointments has impressive progressive immigration credentials and experience;
The balance of Garland’s appointees to date profile much like Sessions’s and Barr’s — not surprising, because Garland used the same flawed recruiting and selection criteria that Barr had been using;
The average U.S. District Judge completes approximately 250 civil matters annually (including immigration matters), https://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/judge/501/;
An Immigration Judge is required to complete 700 cases annually, just too retain his or her job;
Unlike most civil cases in U.S. District Courts, lives and futures are at stake in almost all Immigration Court cases, with the family, communal, economic, and societal effect of each decision often extending far beyond the individual migrant whose life and/or future is at stake.

Members of the NDPA, let AG Garland, VP Harris, and President Biden know that we need a better and more aggressively progressive system for recruiting (virtually “null” right now — “Sir Jeffrey” Chase and I, along with other members of our Round Table, do more “recruiting” among “practical scholars and progressive experts” in the private sector than the Administration!), selecting, training, and retaining Immigration Judges for these life or death determining positions that, in a better functioning and wiser Administration, would be the door to, and training ground for, a better, more diverse, more representative, more progressive Article III Judiciary!

Lack of creative and aggressive recruiting for a better and more diverse expert Immigration Judiciary is a particular sore point! We now have our first immigrant family, African-American, AAPI, female Vice President, Kamala Harris, a talented lawyer! She has an important immigration and human rights portfolio!

So why isn’t she out there aggressively encouraging diverse, well-qualified, progressive “practical scholars and immigration advocates,” many of whom might not have seen themselves as potential Immigration Judges and BIA Members to apply for these critical jobs? Why aren’t the recruiting and selection criteria for IJs and Board Members both more transparent and involving of some outside expert input!

As VP Harris knows, the key to changing the composition of the power structure is for progressives, particularly female progressives of color, to see others like them in these positions to act as role models. It’s going to take aggressive positive actions by individuals like VP Harris, AAG Gupta, and Assistant AG Clarke to “change the face” of the Immigration Judiciary and the power structure for the better!

With the recent hiring of NDPA superstar Professor Cori Alonso Yoder, VP Harris’s alma mater, Howard University Law, now has it’s most high-profile “immigration and human rights presence” ever! Why isn’t VP Harris over there aggressively encouraging Howard Law grads to seek careers in immigration and human rights, eventually aspiring to the the Federal Judiciary, including the Immigration Judiciary? That’s how real change in the power structure happens!

This is becoming a totally inexcusable “blown opportunity” for progressives! Who knows if or when it will come again?

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-30-21

⚖️🗽”SIR JEFFREY” CHASE & I QUOTED BY LAW360’S JENNIFER DOHERTY ON MATTER OF A-C-A-A-

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

Excerpts from Jennifer’s article:

. . . .

Garland’s latest vacatur was well-received by Jeffrey S. Chase and Paul W. Schmidt, who were among 40 retired immigration judges to sign a letter last spring urging Garland to undo all 17 BIA decisions issued by his Trump-appointed predecessors.

“Prohibiting an appellate body from accepting party stipulations below or honoring concessions on appeal is simply insane. Why would any party stipulate to an issue if it will simply be ignored on appeal?” Judge Schmidt said in a statement to Law360, calling such agreements “a really important part of encouraging efficiency in litigation and reducing backlog.”

According to Judge Chase, Monday’s order “will again allow valuable court time to be spent focusing only on issues actually in dispute between the parties, a practice that could save hours of hearing time on a single case.”

“And limiting the scope of administrative review to the issues actually raised on appeal by the parties eliminates the need to sacrifice fairness in order to achieve that increased efficiency,” he continued.

. . . .

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

Those with Law360 access can read Jennifer’s full article, entitled “Garland Deals 4th Blow To Trump Policy In Asylum Order.” https://www.law360.com/articles/1406716/garland-deals-4th-blow-to-trump-policy-in-asylum-order

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-28-21

⚖️😎👍🏼GARLAND MOVES FORWARD BY VACATING ANOTHER TRUMP REGIME INANE PRECEDENT, THIS ONE BY “BILLY THE BIGOT” BARR — Matter of A-C-A-A-, 28 I&N Dec. 351 (A.G. 2021) — BIA Will No Longer Be The Only Tribunal In America Barred From Accepting Party Stipulations & Concessions! — But, DHS Counters With Another Idiotic “Policy Statement” Chastising Desperate Asylum Seekers For Not Using A “Non-Existent” Legal System!

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1415401/download

Matter of A-C-A-A-, Respondent

Decided by Attorney General July 26, 2021

U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Attorney General

(1) Matter of A-C-A-A-, 28 I&N Dec. 84 (A.G. 2020) (“A-C-A-A- I”), is vacated in its entirety. Immigration judges and the Board should no longer follow A-C-A-A- I in pending or future cases and should conduct proceedings consistent with this opinion and the opinions in Matter of L-E-A-, 28 I&N Dec. 304 (A.G. 2021) (“L-E-A- III”), and Matter of A-B-, 28 I&N Dec. 307 (A.G. 2021) (“A-B- III”).

(2) The Board’s longstanding review practices that A-C-A-A- I apparently prohibited, including its case-by-case discretion to rely on immigration court stipulations, are restored.

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

Way to go Judge Garland!

Yes, I feel good about this! This was one of the “Sessions-Barr follow-ons” to A-B-, L-E-A-, and Castro-Tum that had undermined due process and fundamental fairness while inhibiting sound case management. It was part of a virulent, racist, anti-asylum agenda promoted by Trump and Miller and unethically carried out by Sessions and Barr. It was a backlog-building, due-process-denying national disgrace to be sure! One that unethically targeted people of color and sought to improperly eradicate our legal (and moral) obligations to protect refugees — without any legislative authority!

Prohibiting an appellate body from accepting party stipulations below or honoring concessions on appeal is simply insane! Why would any party stipulate to an issue if it will simply be ignored on appeal?

Stipulations are a really important part of encouraging efficiency in litigation and reducing backlog. I used them all the time at both the BIA and the Arlington Immigration Court!

Why on earth would the BIA revisit an issue that was so well-established and logical that the parties had already agreed upon it below? Why would an already overwhelmed tribunal be required to decide issues that were uncontested by the litigants?

No wonder the Immigration Court system was completely out of control and counterproductive during the Trump Administration!

“Floaters” — “Floaters — How The World’s Richest Country Responds To Asylum Seekers” — The Biden Administration still can’t get beyond this “vision” of appropriate treatment of legal asylum seekers. This is the “human face (down)” of “deterrence-only policies.” Six months in, and the Administration still has nobody in leadership who understands human rights, refugees, asylees, and the relationship of scenes like this one to the overall failure of equal justice and dimishment of the rule of law in America.
EDS NOTE: GRAPHIC CONTENT – The bodies of Salvadoran migrant Oscar Alberto Mart??nez Ram??rez and his nearly 2-year-old daughter Valeria lie on the bank of the Rio Grande in Matamoros, Mexico, Monday, June 24, 2019, after they drowned trying to cross the river to Brownsville, Texas. Martinez’ wife, Tania told Mexican authorities she watched her husband and child disappear in the strong current. (AP Photo/Julia Le Duc)

However, lest we start thinking that the Biden Administration finally “gets it” on asylum policy, DHS immediately countered with a totally tone-deaf announcement on “punishing” asylum seekers for the Administration’s failure to live up to it’s campaign promises ands re-establish a viable legal asylum system at the border:

Biden pulls a Trump card…

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/07/26/dhs-statement-resumption-expedited-removal-certain-family-units

DHS Statement on the Resumption of Expedited Removal for Certain Family Units

Release Date:

July 26, 2021

Beginning today, certain family units who are not able to be expelled under Title 42 will be placed in expedited removal proceedings.  Expedited removal provides a lawful, more accelerated procedure to remove those family units who do not have a basis under U.S. law to be in the United States.

Attempting to cross into the United States between ports of entry, or circumventing inspection at ports of entry, is the wrong way to come to the United States.  These acts are dangerous and can carry long-term immigration consequences for individuals who attempt to do so.  The Biden-Harris Administration is working to build a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system, and the Department of Homeland Security continues to take several steps to improve lawful processing at ports of entry and reforms to strengthen the asylum system.

Keywords:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE),

U. S. Border Patrol

Last Published Date: July 26, 2021

Perhaps somebody needs to tell these DHS/Biden Administration scofflaws that: 1) we have no functioning legal asylum system at ports of entry right now; and 2) refugees and asylees can’t wait for the Administration to get its act together. As one asylum seeker from the Northern Triangle stated in a recent Courtside post: “Nobody wants to die.”

Deterrence always has been and always will be a failure, both in terms of legal policy and morality. We need some progressive experts with some guts and ability “on the inside” to fix this system before more lives are lost.

Enough with the inane “wait to die” deterrence statements that actually insult the intelligence of asylum seekers and demean their dire situations! Fixing this system is not rocket science! But, it requires some progressive human rights leadership and expertise now sadly lacking in the Biden Administration’s approach!

😎🇺🇸⚖️Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-27-21

⚖️☹️A GOOD MAN IN THE WRONG JOB — The Last Two GOP Administrations Cut Through The “Levi-Civiletti” Post-Watergate Institutional Reforms @ Justice Like A Hot Knife Through Soft Butter — Garland’s “Old School” Approach Is Likely Doomed To Failure, & Might Take American Democracy With It! — The “St. Louis Gets Pushed Back Put To Sea” Every Day @ Garland’s Broken & Dysfunctional DOJ!☠️⚰️

Judge Merrick Garland — Attorney General Merrick B. Garland — His poignant recollection of the inability of his great aunts to find refuge in the U.S., and their resulting deaths in the Holocaust, haven’t stopped him from daily “pushing the St. Louis back out to sea” and denying legal protections and full due process to asylum seekers at our Southern Border and at EOIR — his “wholly owned court system” that functions more like a branch of DHS enforcement than a court of law!
Official White House Photo
Public Realm

https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2021/07/19/merrick-garland-justice-department-catharsis/

David Montgomery writes in the WashPost:

. . . .

“Garland believes that a thorough de-Trumpification of the Justice Department would … be called partisanship and would call into question the institution of the Justice Department, but the institution has already been called into question,” says Jeff Hauser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. “Sessions and Barr came in with a goal of assaulting and undermining the institution of the Justice Department, and it’s just weird to presume that they failed. We presume that they succeeded. They were in the building. They hired their minions. They assessed people. They politicized everything. Garland presuming that the previous Department of Justice was behaving in good faith requires the same suspension of disbelief as believing dragons are real in a fantasy novel.”

. . . .

And so, we’ll also be judging Garland by another standard: how well his approach fortifies the institution against a future administration that once again disrespects norms and politicizes the rule of law.

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

These quotes go to the heart of the problem with Garland’s stewardship and his naive, ivory tower, ineffectively timid approach to restoring the rule of law at Justice. “By the book” is NOT an effective strategy against opponents who seek to burn the book, bury the ashes, and lie about it! It’s basically no “strategy” all!

I’d be shocked, as would most knowledgeable observers, if the next GOP Administration doesn’t “disrespect the norms and politicize the rule of law.” Not only have the past two GOP Administrations done exactly that, in spades, but that’s basically what today’s GOP stands for: neo-fascist, anti-democracy rule based on big lies and a cult of personality.

To the extent the modern GOP believes in anything, it’s the exercise of power without restraint of law or morality. “Why? Because we can, and you can’t stop us. We’re in power, and you aren’t,” was largely the Trump McConnell mantra, particularly when it came to judges. How did the dying plea of RBG and the appeals of Dems for fairness and consistency in Supremes’ appointments work out? It was a classic “heads I win, tails you lose” that once again left the Dems grasping at thin air.

So, these folks are going to respect long-gone “norms” from the 1970s? “Norms” that couldn’t and didn’t stop Ashcroft, Gonzalez (“Gonzo I”), Mukasey, Sessions, or Barr? You have to be kidding? I don’t know what universe Garland has been living in for the past four plus years, but it doesn’t appear to be this one.

Contrary to Garland’s approach, there is absolutely nothing wrong with:

Coming clean on recent abuses at DOJ;
Replacing lawless immoral intentional misconstructions of law with better progressive ones that adhere to and further both the rule of law and “good government;” and
Replacing political hacks who furthered the White Nationalist agenda or other personnel who “went along to get along” with abuses, to keep their jobs, with progressive experts committed to due process and best practices who’ll get the job of restoring the rule of law, respect, and human dignity done.

Not only is there nothing wrong with the foregoing, but they are moral and practical imperatives if lives are to be saved and our democracy preserved! For Pete’s sake, these are actually the things that Biden and Harris campaigned upon and won! Why is Garland reticent to act upon truth?

This isn’t an “academic exercise!” It’s an actual life or death moment for migrants and for our democracy! And, the opponents are not folks who intend to honor norms established by Garland or any other Dem.

Indeed, they will characterize all of his actions as “radical socialism,” as they already have, regardless of the truth. In many ways, Garland’s incremental, largely passive, approach to “de-Trumpifying justice @ Justice” has been a huge gift to GOP anti-democracy insurrectionists and restrictionists. But, if I were him, I wouldn’t wait for the “thank you note.”

To shrink from the bold decisive actions necessary to clean up the disgraceful mess at the DOJ and its most grotesque manifestations at EOIR shows not only a lack awareness, but a lack of belief in the progressive, democratic, humane values that got Biden and Harris elected in the first place and got Garland his job.

And, it’s not as if the problem with the values and institutional integrity at DOJ started only in the Trump regime. Under Bush II, Ashcroft and his advisor, notorious White Nationalist xenophobe Kris Kobach, had their plan to dismantle due process and fundamental fairness in the Immigration Courts, through compromising the BIA, in action before they even set foot in the building 10th & Pa. Ave. Those changes have actually cost some migrants their lives, and some DOJ attorneys their jobs (for the “crime” of standing up for due process for migrants) even before the Trump kakistocracy arrived.

And, al la Garland, the Obama Administration’s failure to either acknowledge the historical truth or take the obvious and necessary corrective actions sent our Immigration Courts and justice for migrants into a steep decline that became a “death spiral” under Sessions (“Gonzo Apocalypto”) and Barr and continues its accelerated downward trajectory under Garland. It’s a contributing factor in the largely self-created 1.3 million case Immigration Court backlog generated by Sessions and Barr at EOIR.

Indeed, the lack of quality, intellectual honesty, practical guidance, humane values, common sense, expertise, and legitimacy at EOIR has spread to and adversely affected other areas of our beleaguered justice system and now threatens to take down everything in a messy heap. Why a former Article III Appellate Judge can’t grasp that reality and act accordingly is beyond me.

Maybe its because he didn’t personally experience enough of EOIR’s deadly, failed, corner-cutting “work product” at the D.C. Circuit because DC has no “resident Immigration Court.” Maybe it’s because he can’t “connect the dots” between his relatives who died in the Holocaust and having no legal asylum system for those arriving at our Southern border and denying asylum seekers full due process every day @ EOIR.

For the reasons set forth in the article, it seems that Judge Garland is philosophically and by personality incapable of leading and implementing long overdue, critical progressive changes at this point in his otherwise distinguished career. The only hope would be that one of his advisors could light a fire and get him out of his inept centrist institutionalist funk.

But, the two best hopes to do that, Associate Attorney Vanita Gupta and Assistant AG for Civil Rights Kristen Clarke, who should be personally familiar with the practical and racial justice disaster at EOIR and its overall adverse effects on justice in America, have failed to make a visible impact.

Garland needs a practical expert like Dean Kevin Johnson at U.C. Davis Law, Professor Karen Musalo at the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at Hastings Law, Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Associate Dean at Temple Law, Judy Rabinowitz at ACLU, Marielena Hincappie at the National Immigration Justice Center, or someone of equal expertise and stature in civil and human rights to advise him and lead the reform effort at EOIR. Sadly, he does not appear interested in surrounding himself with such capable, talented individuals who could “save him from himself” while saving the lives of those like his great aunts who perished in the Holocaust for want of a viable refugee and asylum system.

Like Garland, I was at the DOJ during the Levi-Civiletti post-Watergate reform era. I once knew him and certainly helped out his “boss” Ben Civiletti on several occasions.

Somewhere in the “archives,” I have a handwritten note from Ben Civiletti expressing his gratitude that he never had to use the “administrative subpoena” and “designation as an “immigration officer” that I had drafted for him in the midst of one of a number of “immigration emergencies” involving a plane on the tarmac.

Somewhere along the line, Merrick seems to have forgotten that even Civiletti was willing to take bold actions when necessary to advance the cause of immigration justice! There was no “precedent” for the Attorney General personally serving an INS subpoena. But, Civiletti was on the verge of doing it, until “Plan A” prevailed, and the crisis was resolved without resorting to “Plan B” or even “Plan C.”

I was also there and directly affected when the likes of Ashcroft, “Gonzo I”, Kobach, and Mukasey cut through those post-Watergate reforms at EOIR as though they never existed, with little resistance except for a few of us “survivors” who adapted and continued to fight for due process and individual justice in a deteriorating system.

I watched in disgust and disbelief as the Obama Administration (“change?” — not so much in immigration) completely “blew” the opportunity to make life and democracy saving corrections at EOIR. I then saw from the outside as “Gonzo Apocalypto” and Barr aggressively and systematically dismantled American justice, starting with the Immigration Courts. Their job was made infinitely easier by the indolence of the Obama Administration in failing to systematically bring progressive reforms and appoint more progressive judges at EOIR.

But, those of us “on the outside” were not just “passively outraged” by the due process and human rights abuses flowing from DOJ, we took action! Among many groups forming the New Due Process Army (“NDPA”), our Round Table of Former Immigration Judges, some of whom had resigned or retired as an act of conscience, helped lead the charge against the Trump regime’s inhumane, scofflaw policies and bogus legal interpretations.

We filed over 100 amicus briefs in tribunals from the Supremes to the BIA, many of them successful in helping to correct and reverse the regime’s anti-due process, anti-immigrant, racially driven policies. We also wrote, educated, did media interviews, organized, inspired others to join the resistance, and voted for change!

Even assuming, as I do, that any future GOP Administration would move to undo progressive reforms and replace progressive judges, their job would be made much more difficult if Garland creates the progressive judiciary that he should at EOIR. Moreover, even if exiled, “true progressive practical scholars” will form the expert backbone of the resistance to neo-fascism in the “next generation” of the Round Table and the NDPA.

Some “graduates” of a progressive Immigration Judiciary could be elevated to the Article III Judiciary where they will have continuing beneficial influence beyond the ability of the next GOP Administration to change. Others could use their knowledge of the system to fight the forces of nativism, restrictionism, White Nationalist myths, and mindless cruelty. Others will run for office and improve our moribund legislative branch! Who knows, we could even get Article I during the Biden Administration, giving a progressive immigration judiciary yet another degree of protection from right-wing political shenanigans!

Garland’s “stuck in the irretrievable past” approach to EOIR and the DOJ generally is blowing a golden, perhaps never-to-come again, chance to finally create an effective progressive judiciary at EOIR and, perhaps most important, to save lives and stop “pushing the St. Louis” back out to sea! It’s something that Biden can’t fully achieve in the Article IIIs. It’s painful to watch him squander the opportunity.

Merrick Garland might well have been a great Supreme Court Justice had Mitch McConnell and the GOP had a serious interest in institutional integrity and preserving norms. They didn’t (which should have been “signal” that got Garland’s attention)! Garland might also have been great Attorney General in a bygone era.

Sadly for both Garland and America, he’s not the “right fit” for the job under today’s realities. Not only will that forever tarnish his reputation, but it could well cost the rest of us our democracy.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever! Timidity and false “restraint” in delivering equal justice for all, never!

The meek might well inherit the earth in the next world. But, they won’t restore the rule of law to the Department of Justice in this one!☠️

Come on, Judge Garland, take off the blinders and show that you are smart, flexible, and capable enough to get beyond the limitations of your past experiences and take the bold, aggressive, courageous, potentially controversial, yet absolutely necessary and long overdue, actions necessary to restore the rule of law at Justice in the 21st year of the 21st Century. And, that starts with progressive due process reforms and major personnel changes at EOIR!

PWS

07-26-21

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

HISTORICAL ADDENDUM FROM HON. “SIR JEFFREY” CHASE:

I actually had Civiletti’s desk at the BIA (I was told that Tony Moscato had brought it with him from Main Justice).

PWS

07-27-21

🗽ASYLUM IS OUR LEGAL OBLIGATION, NOT AN “OPTION” OR SOMETHING TO BE “DETERRED” — “For many migrants in peril, waiting in their home countries for a better time to seek asylum in the U.S. is not – nor could ever be – a viable option. . . . ‘I want to live. I want to be somebody. Nobody wants to die.’”

FROM SPLC:

The message was loud and clear: “Do not come.”

This would be the Biden administration’s initial attempt to deter migrants who fled danger in their home countries from seeking protection in the U.S.

First, President Biden in March discouraged migrants from trekking north to the U.S.-Mexico border to seek asylum. He suggested they stay in their home countries – where many face violence and persecution – as the administration addressed an increase in the number of unaccompanied migrant children crossing the southwestern border.

Then, the administration continued to rely on the contested Trump-era Title 42 order by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to reject migrants at ports of entry and expel those who cross the U.S.-Mexico border without authorization, thereby denying their legal right to seek asylum.

And in June, the administration delivered another warning to would-be asylum seekers from Guatemala: “Do not come,” said Vice President Kamala Harris during a news conference alongside Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei. “The United States will continue to enforce our laws and secure our borders. If you come to our border, you will be turned back.”

Sarah Rich, senior supervising attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Immigrant Justice Project, said the vice president’s comments were strikingly similar to rhetoric employed by the Trump administration.

“Seeking protection from violence and persecution is a fundamental human right, and the right to seek asylum is protected by U.S. and international law,” Rich said. “These remarks fly in the face of the right to seek asylum in the U.S. and indicate a disturbing continuity between the Trump administration and the Biden-Harris administration.”

For many migrants in peril, waiting in their home countries for a better time to seek asylum in the U.S. is not – nor could ever be – a viable option.

“I fled my country because I wanted to survive,” Emiliana Doe, whose name has been changed in this story to protect her identity, told the SPLC in Spanish. “I want to live. I want to be somebody. Nobody wants to die.”

READ MORE

In solidarity,

Your friends at the Southern Poverty Law Center

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

Speak out against the Biden Administration’s continuation of Trump’s illegal, inhumane, anti-asylum policies at the border! Demand that AG Garland replace unqualified “Miller Lite” anti-asylum Immigration Judges, who happily furthered the past regime’s xenophobic, anti-due-process policies, with far better qualified progressive experts! Demand a BIA that will be a courageous leader in granting legal protection and reducing backlogs through best practices and full due process! Demand that Garland stop dragging his feet and finally fulfill the original EOIR vision of “guaranteeing fairness and due process for all.” Demand an Attorney General with the backbone and integrity to tell Biden, Harris, & Mayorkas that their continued abrogation of asylum laws and international obligations, not to mention Constitutional protections, is grossly illegal and must end NOW!

By contrast with Garland’s timid, dilatory, and often apparently indifferent approach to the rule of law for migrants, not to mention human lives, Jeff Sessions had absolutely no problem intervening, without invitation, in any agency’s programs and policies to advance his White Nationalist, nativist, xenophobic mis-interpretations of the law!

🇺🇸⚖️Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-25-21

⚖️🧑🏽‍⚖️☹️GARLAND’S 10 NEW IJ APPOINTMENTS CONTINUE TO HEAVILY FAVOR GOVERNMENT OVER PRIVATE PRACTICE, CLINICS, ACADEMIA — Only 3 Came Directly From Private Practice — Biden Administration “Disses” Progressive Immigration/Human Rights Experts Who Helped Put Them In Office!

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1412741/download

NOTICE

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Office of Policy

5107 Leesburg Pike

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

Contact: Communications and Legislative Affairs Division

Phone: 703-305-0289 Fax: 703-605-0365

PAO.EOIR@usdoj.gov @DOJ_EOIR www.justice.gov/eoir

July 16, 2021

EOIR Announces 10 New Immigration Judges

FALLS CHURCH, VA – The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) today announced 10 new Immigration Judges (IJs), including one Assistant Chief Immigration Judge (ACIJ). ACIJs are responsible for overseeing the operations of their assigned immigration courts. In addition to their management responsibilities, they will hear cases. IJs preside in formal judicial hearings and make decisions that are final, unless formally appealed.

After a thorough application process, Attorney General Merrick B. Garland appointed Megan R. Jackler, Justin S. Dinsdale, Alexander H. Lee, Loi L. McCleskey, Edwin E. Pieters, Artie R. Pobjecky, Jodie A. Schwab, Kenneth S. Sogabe, Lydia G. Tamez, and Romaine L. White to their new positions.

Biographical information follows:

Megan R. Jackler, Assistant Chief Immigration Judge, New Orleans Immigration Court

Megan R. Jackler was appointed as an Assistant Chief Immigration Judge to begin supervisory immigration court duties and hearing cases in July 2021. Judge Jackler earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2003 from Barnard College and a Juris Doctor in 2008 from the American University Washington College of Law. From 2009 to 2021, she served as a U.S. Navy Judge Advocate, in the following locations: Norfolk, Virginia; Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; Gulfport, Mississippi; Mazar- e-Sharif, Afghanistan; and Yokosuka, Japan. From 2003 to 2005, she was a Litigation Paralegal with Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, in New York. Judge Jackler is a member of the District of Columbia Bar, New Jersey State Bar, New York State Bar, and Virginia State Bar.

Justin S. Dinsdale, Immigration Judge, Houston – Greenspoint Park Immigration Court

Justin S. Dinsdale was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge Dinsdale earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2000 from Texas Christian University and a Juris Doctorate in 2004 from South Texas College of Law Houston. From 2015 to 2021, he served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas, in Brownsville. From 2011 to 2015, he was in private practice with the Law Office of Justin S. Dinsdale, in Brownsville. From 2008 to 2010, he was an Associate Attorney with Rodriguez, Colvin, Chaney & Saenz LLP, in Brownsville. From 2004 to 2008, he served as an Assistant District Attorney with the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office, in Brownsville. Judge Dinsdale is a member of the Idaho State Bar and the State Bar of Texas.

Communications and Legislative Affairs Division

EOIR Announces 10 New Immigration Judges

Page 2

Alexander H. Lee, Immigration Judge, Houston – Greenspoint Park Immigration Court

Alexander H. Lee was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge Lee earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1997 from Kenyon College and a Juris Doctor in 2002 from Chicago-Kent College of Law. From 2017 to 2021, he served as an Assistant Chief Counsel, Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, in Pearsall and San Antonio, Texas. From 2011 to 2017, he served as a Staff Attorney for the Washington State Department of Health, in Tumwater, Washington. From 2005 to 2011, he was in private practice in Olympia, Washington. Judge Lee is a member of the Washington State Bar.

Loi L. McCleskey, Immigration Judge, San Francisco Immigration Court

Loi L. McCleskey was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge McCleskey earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1996 from Capital University and a Juris Doctor in 1999 from Capital University Law School. From 2013 to 2021, she served as an Administrative Hearing Officer Supervisor; from 2011 to 2013, Senior Administrative Hearing Officer; and from 2003 to 2011, Administrative Hearing Officer for the State of Ohio in Columbus. From 2000 to 2003, she was in private practice in Columbus. Judge McCleskey is a member of the Ohio State Bar.

Edwin E. Pieters, Immigration Judge, New York – Federal Plaza Immigration Court

Edwin E. Pieters was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge Pieters earned a Bachelor of Science in 1987 from State University of New York at New Paltz; a Master of Political Science/Governmental Law in 1992 from City University of New York at Brooklyn College; a Master of Public Administration in 2000 from City University of New York at Baruch College; a Juris Doctorate in 2002 from the City University of New York Law School at Queens College; and a Master of Law in 2005 from the State University of New York at Buffalo Law School. From 2018 to 2021, he served as a Hearing Officer for the New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings. From 2006 to 2017, he served as an Assistant District Attorney at the Kings County District Attorney’s Office, in Brooklyn. Judge Pieters is a member of the New York State Bar.

Artie R. Pobjecky, Immigration Judge, Houston – Greenspoint Park Immigration Court

Artie R. Pobjecky was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge Pobjecky earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1997 from the University of Central Florida and a Juris Doctor in 2001 from Baylor University School of Law. From 2007 to 2021, she was a Partner with Pobjecky & Pobjecky LLP, in Winter Haven, Florida. From 2015 to 2017, she served as Chair of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, Central Florida Chapter. From 2002 to 2007, she was an Associate Attorney with J. David Pobjecky PA, in Winter Haven. Judge Pobjecky is a member of the Florida Bar, Pennsylvania Bar, and the State Bar of Texas.

Jodie A. Schwab, Immigration Judge, Houston – Greenspoint Park Immigration Court

Jodie A. Schwab was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge Schwab earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1990 from the University of Texas at San Antonio and a Juris Doctor in 1993 from St. Mary’s University School of Law. From 2018 to 2021, she served as an Assistant Chief Counsel, Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, in Houston. From 2017 to 2018, she was Senior Counsel with Greer, Herz & Adams LLP, in League City, Texas. From 2006 to 2017,

Communications and Legislative Affairs Division

EOIR Announces 10 New Immigration Judges

Page 3

she served as a Law Clerk to the Honorable Magistrate Judge John Froeschner, with the U.S. District Courts, Southern District of Texas. From 2005 to 2006, she served as a Deputy Attorney General, California Office of the Attorney General, in Sacramento, California. From 2004 to 2005, she was a Litigation Attorney for a Staff Counsel Office with Farmers Insurance Exchange, in Stockton, California. From 1994 to 2003, she was Counsel at United Services Automobile Association, in San Antonio. Judge Schwab is a member of the State Bar of California and State Bar of Texas.

Kenneth S. Sogabe, Immigration Judge, Seattle Immigration Court

Kenneth S. Sogabe was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge Sogabe earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1995 and a Master of Arts in 1996, both from San Francisco State University, and a Juris Doctor in 2001 from Golden Gate University School of Law. From 2018 to 2021, he served as Associate General Counsel, Office of General Counsel, Department of Defense Education Activity, in Okinawa, Japan. From 2014 to 2018, he served as an Attorney Advisor, Office of Chief Counsel, Customs and Border Protection, DHS, in San Francisco. From 2007 to 2014, he served as a Staff Attorney for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco. From 2001 to 2006, he served as an Assistant Chief Counsel, Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in San Francisco. Judge Sogabe is a member of the State Bar of California.

Lydia G. Tamez, Immigration Judge, Houston – Greenspoint Park Immigration Court

Lydia G. Tamez was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge Tamez earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1981 from Yale University and a Juris Doctor in 1985 from Yale Law School. From 2019 to 2021, she served as an Associate Judge for the City of Houston Municipal Courts. From 2016 to 2021, she was in private practice in Houston. From 2015 to 2016, she was a Counselor at Law with Graves and Graves LLP, in Houston. From 2012 to 2015, she was a Partner with Foster LLP, in Houston. From 2003 to 2011, she was an Associate General Counsel; from 1999 to 2003, a Senior Attorney; and from 1995 to 1999, an Attorney for Legal and Corporate Affairs, with Microsoft Corporation, in Redmond, Washington. From 1986 to 1995, she was an Attorney for Tindall and Foster PC, in Houston. Judge Tamez is a member of the State Bar of Texas and the Washington State Bar.

Romaine L. White, Immigration Judge, Houston – Greenspoint Park Immigration Court

Romaine L. White was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021. Judge White earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1983 from the University of Virginia and a Juris Doctor in 1986 from the University of Georgia School of Law. From 2012 to 2021, she served as an Administrative Law Judge for the Louisiana Division of Administrative Law, in New Orleans. From 2004 to 2021, and previously from 1999 to 2001, she was a sole practitioner with the Law Office of Romaine L. White LLC, in Houma, Louisiana. From 2001 to 2006, she served as an Assistant Parish Attorney for the Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government, in Houma. From 2001 to 2004, she was an Associate Attorney with McNabb and Associates, in Houma. From 1997 to 1998, she served as Deputy General Counsel for the State Bar of Georgia, in Atlanta. From 1991 to 1997, she served as a Senior Assistant City Attorney for the City of Atlanta. From 1986 to 1991, she was an Associate Attorney with Griffin, Cochrane, & Marshall, in Atlanta. Judge White is a member of the State Bar of Georgia and the Louisiana State Bar. Communications and Legislative Affairs Division

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

The three appointments from private practice include Judge Linda G. Tamez of Houston who appears to have served as a Municipal Judge in Houston while in private practice from 2019-21. Similarly, Judge Romaine L. White of Houston Greenspoint appears to have maintained a private practice while serving as a Louisiana State ALJ from 2012-21.

The sole new IJ to list AILA experience is Judge Artie J. Pobjecky of the Houston Greenspoint Immigration Court, who served as Chair of the AILA, Central Florida Chapter, from 2015-2017. She is also the only new appointee who appears to have been working primarily in the private practice of immigration law at the time of her appointment.

Several other appointees did have some type of private sector experiences, although they were serving in various government positions at the time of appointment. None, however, stood out as having much, if any, experience representing individuals in Immigration Court in this broken and dysfunctional system.

It’s super critical for NDPA members to 1) keep applying en masse for these jobs, and 2) let your extreme dis-satisfaction with Garland’s tone-deaf, one sided appointments to the Immigration Courts be known to the Biden Administration.

We need to keep attacking until the walls of anti-expert, anti-advocate, anti-private-sector, anti-diversity bias that has been “baked into” the DOJ IJ and BIA selection process for the better part of several decades is finally broken and excellence and practical scholarship in immigration, human rights, and due process finally break through and prevail. Also, continuing to pummel the Garland EOIR’s substandard work product in the Article IIIs will keep illustrating the point that something has got to change here!

In the meantime, keep pushing Congress for an independent Immigration Court that will be free of the DOJ bureaucracy and will require a merit-based selection system with input from “outside experts!”

🇺🇸Due Process Forever! Status quo, never!

PWS

07-19-21

⚖️😎👍🏼AFTER FOUR YEARS OF BACKLOG-BUILDING NATIVIST NONSENSE & XENOPHOBIA @ DOJ, JUDGE GARLAND RETURNS THE TOOLS IMMIGRATION JUDGES & PARTIES NEED TO MANAGE & REDUCE IMMIGRATION COURT DOCKETS — “Micromanagement” From DC & Falls Church By Politicos & Toadies Doesn’t Work! 🤮☠️ — Julia Edwards Ainsley 🌟 Reports For NBC News!

Julia Edwards Ainsley
NBC Correspondent
Justice & DHS
Outside Justice Dep’t
Photo: Victoria Pickering https://www.flickr.com/photos/vpickering/

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/garland-reverses-trump-era-immigration-order-move-will-cut-huge-n1274077

IMMIGRATION

Garland reversesTrump-era immigration order in move that will cut huge backlog of asylum cases

The move will cut the ballooning backlog of 1.3 million immigration cases in the U.S. It is Garland’s third such reversal of Trump policy.

July 15, 2021, 1:28 PM EDT

By Julia Ainsley

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday reversed an order from Trump’s Attorney Generald Jeff Sessions that barred immigration judges from closing cases and removing them from their docket if they deem them low-priority.

The move will cut down on the ballooning backlog of immigration cases in the U.S., now surpassing 1.3 million, according to data compiled by TRAC out of Syracuse University.

Garland said in his order that immigration judges’ ability to administratively close cases previously allowed “government counsel to request that certain low-priority cases be removed from the immigration judges’ active calendars,” thereby allowing judges “to focus on higher-priority cases.”

Garland previously overturned two other immigration court decisions by his Trump-era predecessors that had made it harder for victims of gang and domestic violence to win asylum.

. . . .

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

Thanks, Julia, for highlighting the “cosmic importance” of this decision and its “good government” potential! Read the rest of Julia’s article at the above link.

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-18-21

⚖️YET ANOTHER “WAKEUP CALL” FOR JUDGE GARLAND, AS 3RD CIR. CASTIGATES THE “HASTE MAKES WASTE, FORM CHECKER, DEPORTATION ASSEMBLY LINE CULTURE” @ EOIR! — “We cannot allow an IJ or the BIA to dispense with an adequate explanation of a final decision merely to facilitate or accommodate administrative expediency.”

EYORE — “Eyore In Distress”
Once A Symbol of Fairness, Due Process, & Best Practices, Now Gone “Belly Up”

https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca3-on-something-to-review—valarezo-tirado-v-a-g

Dan Kowalski reports for LexisNexis Immigration Community:

CA3 on “Something to Review” – Valarezo-Tirado v. A.G.

Valarezo-Tirado v. A.G.

“We have previously granted a petition for review in which the alleged basis for the BIA’s denial of relief was that “the evidence is insufficient” and “the arguments made by the [government] on appeal . . . are persua[sive]” because we could not “perform meaningful review of [such an] order.” Here, we have even less to work with. … The most fundamental notion of due process must include an opportunity for meaningful judicial review. We reiterate that “judicial review necessarily requires something to review and, if the agency provides only its result without an explanation of the underlying fact finding and analysis, a court is unable to provide judicial review.” The required review is simply not possible when we are provided with nothing more than the kind of one-line checklist that is relied upon here. We cannot allow an IJ or the BIA to dispense with an adequate explanation of a final decision merely to facilitate or accommodate administrative expediency. Since “the [IJ]’s failure of explanation makes it impossible for us to review its rationale, we [will] grant [Valarezo-Tirado’s] petition for review, vacate the [IJ’s] order, and remand the matter to [the IJ] for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.” … A 2019 study found that “on average each [immigration] judge currently has an active pending caseload of over two thousand cases.” Nevertheless, we cannot allow incredibly difficult logistics to give license to IJs to skirt their responsibilities. This includes the obligation to inform the petitioner of the reasons for the IJ’s decision and provide an adequate explanation of the decision that does not require us to parse through the testimony in search of evidence that supports it. A two-sentence recitation on a bullet-point form will rarely, if ever, provide sufficient reasoning for a decision. A decision, such as the one here, that does not refer to record evidence will never suffice. Because, here, the IJ’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence, we will vacate the decision and order and remand to the IJ for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

[Hats off to pro bono publico counsel Robert D. Helfand and Charles W. Stotter!]

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

Hey, Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions said it: “Volume is critical. It just is.” For him, and then Barr, it was “all about numbers,” never about quality, fairness, or judicial independence!

SESSIONS USES SPEECH TO U.S. IMMIGRATION JUDGES TO SPREAD LIES, MOUNT ALL OUT ATTACK ON US ASYLUM LAW AND INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION LAWS – Targets Most Vulnerable Refugee Women Of Color For Latest Round Of Legal Abuses – Orders Judges To Prejudge Applications In Accordance With His Rewrite Of Law – It’s “Kangaroo Court” – The Only Question Now Is Whether Congress & Article III’s Will Let Him Get Away With Latest Perversion Of Justice @ Justice!

Interestingly, this was a “reasonable fear review” proceeding following “reinstatement” of a removal order. Even before the Trump kakistocracy, Immigration Judges once were told that there was no need for a reasoned decision because their actions were “non-reviewable” by the BIA or the Circuits. Later, in the Obama Administration, as some Circuits took an interest in these cases, judges were encouraged by EOIR HQ to enter brief decisions so that OIL could defend them on appeal, if their “no jurisdiction to review” argument failed.

There is a serious defect in a system that provides no meaningful review or appellate direction in cases with life or death consequences. Obviously, this is a system focused on something other than fairness, scholarship, quality, and justice!

After years of being told (even forced, through bogus “production quotas’) to “cut corners” and “move ‘em out” by their political “handlers” at the DOJ, neither EOIR “management” nor the current BIA is capable of providing the bold leadership, progressive “fair but efficient” scholarship and direction, quality control, and positive precedents and systemic changes necessary to insure that EOIR’s “once and future vision” of “through teamwork and innovation, becoming the world’s best tribunals guaranteeing fairness and due process for ALL” is finally realized. After four years or intentional degradation and movement in exactly the OPPOSITE direction by Sessions, Barr, and their “Miller Lite” cronies and toadies, it’s time for a change!

Obviously, the due-process-denying and demeaning (to both IJs and those seeking justice) “production quotas” and equally bureaucratic and bogus “performance work plans” should already have been revoked by Garland. They could replaced with a meaningful system of appellate supervision and judicial professional responsibility and training modeled on that of “real courts.” For example, check out the system used by the DC Court system to maintain professionalism, provide constructive feedback, and make recommendations for tenure decisions on judges, with both public and peer participation.

As the Third Circuit points out, high volume is not an excuse for sloppy work and denial of due process! The backlog can be slashed and justice restored, and even improved, while maintaining high standards of quality and implementing and enforcing best practices. EOIR indeed could become a “model progressive court system.” But, it’s going to take a new team of progressive judges and qualified progressive Administrators, folks with experience in the “horrors of today’s Immigration (not) Courts” and an unswerving commitment to due process and best practices to get the job done!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-16-21

😎👍YES! IN A HUGE WIN FOR DUE PROCESS, EFFICIENCY, JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE, & SANE GOVERNMENT, AG GARLAND OVERRULES SESSIONS’S IDIOTIC MATTER OF CASTRO-TUM PRECEDENT & RESTORES IJs’ AUTHORITY TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE CASES — Matter of Cruz-Valdez, 28 I&N Dec. 326 (A.G. 2021)

The Attorney General has issued a decision in Matter of Cruz-Valdez, 28 I&N Dec. 326 (A.G. 2021).

(1) Matter of Castro‑Tum, 27 I&N Dec. 271 (A.G. 2018), is overruled in its entirety.

(2) While rulemaking proceeds and except when a court of appeals has held otherwise, immigration judges and the Board should apply the standard for administrative closure set out in Matter of Avetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012), and Matter of W‑Y‑U‑, 27 I&N Dec. 17 (BIA 2017).

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

Sessions’s Castro-Tum abomination had to be one of the stupidest and most maliciously incompetent aspects of his White Nationalist, anti-asylum, anti-due-process agenda! Not surprisingly, that decision and the illegal attempt to convert it into a regulation have mostly been losers in the Article III Courts.

Hats 🎩 off to Judge Garland for doing the right thing (even if it did take longer than some of us thought it should)! This also ties in perfectly with the recent common sense restoration of enforcement priorities and prosecutorial discretion at ICE by OPLA head John Trasvina! https://immigrationcourtside.com/category/department-of-homeland-security/immigration-customs-enforcement-ice/office-of-principal-legal-adviser-opla/john-d-trasvina/

After four years of virtually unrelenting illegality, mismanagement, and outright idiocy at DHS and DOJ, that has caused “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” and generated ever-mushrooming court backlogs, finally some much-needed and long overdue teamwork and reasonability in restoring to Immigration Judges and the parties the necessary tools for rational, cooperative docket management. Presumably, the hundreds of thousands of cases “waiting in the wings” to be “re-docketed” pursuant to “Sessions’s folly” can now remain administratively closed or be “re-closed” and removed from the EOIR docket!

Along those same lines, “Sir Jeffrey” Chase reports some more good news:

More Good News!

Ms. A-B- (i.e. the respondent in Matter of A-B-) was granted asylum yesterday.The BIA granted pursuant to a joint motion from DHS and respondent’s counsel to grant asylum.

It took far too long, but justice prevailed.

Best, Jeff

That’s the type of cooperative action among the parties and EOIR that, if repeated on a larger scale, could restore functionality and some semblance of justice to our broken Immigration Courts!

Also, many congrats to my friend Karen Musalo and her team at the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at Hastings Law for their outstanding, persistent, and ultimately successful defense of Ms. A-B- against Sessions’s misogynistic “war on asylum seekers of color.”

It’s a telling commentary that finally getting the law back to where it was in 2016, “pre-Sessions,” now seems like a major victory! Just think of what might have been accomplished if all the effort expended on combatting the Trump immigration kakistocracy’s illegality, nonsense, and wasteful gimmicks had instead been devoted to advancing and promoting due process and fundamental fairness for all persons in America!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-15-21

⚖️5TH CIRCUIT BELATEDLY “OUTS” IJ AGNELIS REESE (NOW RETIRED) FOR 99.5% ASYLUM DENIAL RECORD — “We find it likely that a ‘reasonable man, were he to know all the circumstances, would harbor doubts about the judge’s impartiality.’” Inexplicably Garland & Co. Let Other “Asylum Deniers Club” Members Continue to Wreak Havoc On Asylum Seekers, Their Lawyers, & The Entire U.S. Justice System!🤮

“Miller Lite” – Garland’s Vision of “Justice @ Justice” for Communities of Color — As asylum seekers and their fearless advocates suffer and the Immigration “Courts” disintegrate, there appears to be no end to “Garland’s Miller-Lite Happy Hour” @ DOJ!

Dan Kowalski Reports for LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/rare-ca5-stay-grant-singh-v-garland#

Rare CA5 Stay Grant: Singh v. Garland

Singh v. Garland

“Daljinder Singh applied for asylum and protection under the Convention Against Torture, claiming that he feared persecution in India based on his membership in the Akali Dal Amritsar (“Mann Party”), a Sikh-dominated political party. The presiding immigration judge (“IJ”) denied his application, finding Singh not credible. The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissed Singh’s appeal. Singh filed a petition for review and moved for a stay of removal. We granted Singh an emergency stay of removal pending further order. We now grant Singh a stay pending review of his petition. … Singh raises two principal arguments in his petition for review. First, he contends that the IJ’s near total denial rate for asylum applications reflected a bias and violated Singh’s due process rights. Second, he challenges the BIA’s conclusion that the IJ adhered to the procedural safeguards the BIA adopted in Matter of R-K-K-, applicable when an IJ relies on inter-proceeding similarities for an adverse credibility determination. We conclude that Singh has made the requisite showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits of both claims. … The IJ here [Agnelis Reese] denied relief to asylum seekers in 203 of the 204 cases she presided over from 2014 to 2019, a denial rate of 99.5%. … … Given the accounts of multiple witnesses to the attacks on Singh, medical records, images of the attacks on his father, and witness testimony regarding the BJP’s continued pursuit of Singh, Singh has made the requisite showing that the totality of the evidence does not support the IJ’s credibility determination. The appearance of bias painted by the denial of 203 of 204 asylum applications and the IJ’s adverse-credibility determination, informed by her noncompliance with the procedural safeguards of Matter of R-K-K-, are here interlaced. We do not suggest that a high percentage of denials is sufficient to avoid an IJ’s otherwise valid credibility determinations. Indeed, patterns in applicants’ presentations are likely and may necessarily result in a higher denial rate if the shared basis for relief is inadequate. But here, the incredibly high denial rate, when coupled with the IJ’s noncompliance with Matter of R-K-K-, presents a substantial likelihood that Singh will be entitled to relief upon full consideration by a merits panel. … Accordingly, we GRANT Singh’s motion for a stay pending review of his petition.”

[Hats way off to Peter Rogers!]

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

So, if the 5th Circuit and a “reasonable man” could figure out this isn’t “justice,” by any stretch of the imagination, why on earth 1) can’t Garland do likewise, and 2) does he continue to have his lawyers defend this disgraceful nonsense and waste of taxpayer money? Reese has previously been “featured” in Courtside for her “Kafkaesque” approach to “justice” for asylum seekers. Several years ago, I spoke at a Louisiana State Bar CLE event where attorney after attorney shared their “horror stories” about Reese. Yet, she managed to last for more than two decades over four different Administrations, two Democratic and two Republican.

Thankfully for American justice, Judge Reese retired in 2020, after more than two decades of abusing asylum seekers and disgracing the Immigration Courts! But, she was by no means the only unqualified Immigration Judge who helped create disgraceful and illegal “Asylum Free Zones” in Immigration Courtrooms throughout America.

A number of members of the “Asylum Denial Club” remain on the bench @ EOIR. Outrageously, some of them were even “rewarded” with appointments to the BIA by the previous Administration!

Rather than swiftly moving to replace the BiA and then commencing a thorough, long overdue “housecleaning” of unqualified judges and managers at EOIR, Garland, Monaco, Gupta, and Clarke have dawdled as asylum seekers continue to be abused, mistreated, denied due process, and justice mocked at EOIR. A civil rights/racial injustice/due process crisis of gargantuan proportions is going on right under their noses, and they have done very little to acknowledge or address it!

Not to mention that under Garland’s lackadaisical leadership the Immigration Courts continue to build unnecessary backlog at “Trumpian” rates. It’s not like experts haven’t brought the grotesque injustices and defects of EOIR to the attention of the Biden Administration and Garland!

One might ask just what Garland and his top lieutenants are doing to earn their pay? The answer is “not much” to date from a progressive standpoint!

Experts and advocates should be “raising hell” with the Biden Administration about the deficient due process and racial justice leadership at the DOJ! American justice deserves better! Much better!

And, the other Circuit Courts (particularly the 11th Circuit) that have looked the other way at the biased decision-making and other unconstitutional travesties of justice going on in Immigration Court on a regular basis don’t look so good either!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-14-21

Here’s a link to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, courtesy of Dan Kowalski over at LexisNexis Immigration Community:

And, here’s my “quick take:”

🇺🇸DPF,

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Dan Kowalski reports on LexisNexis Immigration Community:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Dean Kevin Johnson reports for ImmigrationProf Blog:

Meanwhile, Tyche Hendricks reports @ KQED News on the ongoing mess @ EOIR:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Excerpts from Jennifer’s article:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

😎🇺🇸⚖️Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

David Montgomery writes in the WashPost:

HISTORICAL ADDENDUM FROM HON. “SIR JEFFREY” CHASE:

Related posts:

FROM SPLC:

🇺🇸⚖️Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Related posts:

Garland reversesTrump-era immigration order in move that will cut huge backlog of asylum cases

The move will cut the ballooning backlog of 1.3 million immigration cases in the U.S. It is Garland’s third such reversal of Trump policy.

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Dan Kowalski reports for LexisNexis Immigration Community:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Dan Kowalski Reports for LexisNexis Immigration Community:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts: