BARR EXPANDS “NEW AMERICAN GULAG” — Indefinite Detention Without Bond Hearings For Those Who Establish Credible Fear Of Persecution — DHS Detention Capacity Already Outstripped, Requiring 90 Day Delay In Implementing!

Matter of M-S-, 27 I&N Dec. 509 (A.G. 2019)

matter_m-s-_27_in_dec._509_a.g._2019_002

BIA HEADNOTE:

(1) Matter of X-K-, 23 I&N Dec. 731 (BIA 2005), was wrongly decided and is overruled.
(2) An alien who is transferred from expedited removal proceedings to full removal proceedings after establishing a credible fear of persecution or torture is ineligible for release on bond. Such an alien must be detained until his removal proceedings conclude, unless he is granted parole.

KEY QUOTE:

Because Matter of X-K- declared a sizable population of aliens to be eligible for bond, DHS indicates that my overruling that decision will have “an immediate and significant impact on [its] detention operations.” DHS Br. 23 n.16. DHS accordingly requests that I delay the effective date of this decision “so that DHS may conduct necessary operational planning.” Id. Federal circuit courts have discretion to delay the effective dates of their decisions, see Fed. R. App. P. 41(b), and I conclude that I have similar discretion. I will delay the effective date of this decision for 90 days so that DHS may conduct the necessary operational planning for additional detention and parole decisions.

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

Short Takes:

  • An increase in mandatory detention is sure to mean more “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” (“ADR”); as more detained cases are moved to the front of the docket, they will displace lower priority (but “ready to try”) non-detained cases which will be “shuffled off to Buffalo” thus increasing the already overwhelming backlog; as more Immigration Judges are sent to detention facilities near the border, they will “leave behind” already full dockets creating even more chaos in an already dysfunctional system;
  • Expanding mandatory detention raises the stakes even higher in the pending litigation on whether mandatory prehearing detention without recourse to individualized bond determinations by Immigration Judges violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment — See Rodriguez v. Marin, https://immigrationcourtside.com/2018/11/27/our-gang-in-action-9th-cir-remands-jennings-v-rodriguez-keeps-injunction-in-effect-hints-that-administration-scofflaws-could-be-in-for-another-big-loss-will-we-see-th/
  • Obviously, planning for the result they asked for (and these days were almost certain to get from the AG) wasn’t part of the DHS program.

PWS

04-16-19

SESSIONS PLANS TO EXPAND “NEW AMERICAN GULAG” BY ELIMINATING BONDS FOR THOSE WITH A CREDIBLE FEAR OF PERSECUTION – AG Now Intends To Overrule Matter of X-K-, 23 I&N Dec. 731 (BIA 2005) – Matter of M-G-G-, 27 I&N Dec. 27 I&N Dec. 469 (A.G. 2018)

MGG-Bond3938

Here it is in all of its in-glory:

Cite as 27 I&N Dec. 469 (A.G. 2018) Interim Decision #3938

Matter of M-G-G-, Respondent

Decided by Attorney General September 18, 2018

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

The Attorney General referred the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals to himself for review of issues relating to the authority to hold bond hearings for certain aliens screened for expedited removal proceedings, ordering that the case be stayed during the pendency of his review.

BEFORE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(h)(1)(i) (2018), I direct the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) to refer this case to me for review of its decision. The Board’s decision in this matter is automatically stayed pending my review. See Matter of Haddam, A.G. Order No. 2380-2001 (Jan. 19, 2001). To assist me in my review, I invite the parties to these proceedings and interested amici to submit briefs on points relevant to the disposition of this case, including:

Whether Matter of X-K-, 23 I&N Dec. 731 (BIA 2005), which held that immigration judges may hold bond hearings for certain aliens screened from expedited removal proceedings under section 235(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1), into removal proceedings under section 240, 8 U.S.C. § 1229a, should be overruled in light of Jennings v. Rodriguez, 138 S. Ct. 830 (2018).

The parties’ briefs shall not exceed 15,000 words and shall be filed on or before October 9, 2018. Interested amici may submit briefs not exceeding 9,000 words on or before October 16, 2018. The parties may submit reply briefs not exceeding 6,000 words on or before October 16, 2018. All filings shall be accompanied by proof of service and shall be submitted electronically to AGCertification@usdoj.gov, and in triplicate to:

United States Department of Justice Office of the Attorney General, Room 5114 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530

All briefs must be both submitted electronically and postmarked on or before the pertinent deadlines. Requests for extensions are disfavored.

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

More reductions in the authority of U.S. Immigraton Judges on tap. They are rapidly being reduced to the status of “Robed Deportation Officers.” If Sessions were around long enough, I’m sure he eventually would have them disrobed and dressed in DHS Uniforms to represent their true function.

This is sure to “tee up” some big-time Fifth Amendment Constitutional litigation in the Article IIIs regarding the Government’s authority to detain indefinitely without bond. And, those who have passed credible fear and their children probably present the “best conceivable” plaintiffs for those challenging the indefinite detention authority. Moreover, since bond cases initially are reviewed in U.S. District Courts, rather than in Courts of Appeals, Sessions will be setting up the possibility of lots of different U.S. District Judges getting into the act, as well as the possibility for other nationwide injunctions.

The Administration will also face a strong Fifth Amendment challenge to its proposed “kiddie detention” regulations. Moreover, Jennings v. Rodriguez is actually on remand for the Ninth Circuit to consider the plaintiffs Constitutional challenge to indefinite detention without bond hearings.

So, in addition to artificially “jacking up the Immigration Court backlogs” Sessions has found a way to keep the Federal Courts occupied with avoidable Constitutional litigation on many fronts. At some point, that should impair the Federal Courts ability to hear anything except immigration disputes and start “jacking up” their backlogs of other types of cases.

Given the total fiasco of his “zero tolerance policy,” more mindless detention of asylum seekers and their families doesn’t seem to be a national priority to anybody except the Trump/Sessions White Nationalist Cabal.

As I’ve observed before, knowing that his time in office is likely to end after the November midterms, Sessions is working furiously to inflict as much permanent damage on the U.S. justice system and to harm as many migrants, particularly refugees and asylum seekers, as possible before Trump throws him out.

Whether intentionally or not, Sessions is focusing attention on three things that a future more responsible Congress must address:

  • Getting the Immigration Courts out of the Executive Branch so that never again can they be co-opted by a White Nationalist extremist like Sessions;
  • Severely curtailing both the authority and the funding for civil immigration detention by the Executive;
  • Amending the asylum law to serve its original generous protection purposes by codifying the “benefit of the doubt” standard and specifically stating that “gender” shall be considered a “particular social group” under the refugee and asylum laws. 

Until then, expect lots of unnecessary pain and suffering to be gratuitously inflicted on the most vulnerable among us.

Obama and the Democrats had the chance to make these changes, as well as to protect Dreamers, back in 2009. They blew it! Now refugees and immigrants are paying the price.

PWS

09-19-18