According to the article below, originally from The Tennessean, a bill that would allow law enforcement to check someone’s immigration status if pulled over or detained has been put on hold, at least for now.
TN Lawmaker Puts Immigration Bill on Hold
From the Tennessean
Click here to read >>
Posted in immigration news, legal news
Today, U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer urged the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to give a one-year “deferred action” legal status to immigrants whose court removal cases have been administratively closed under new immigration initiatives. This “deferred action” legal status would give a small group of non-criminal immigrants the ability to work while the deportation of higher priority criminal cases are processed first, which is expected to take over a year.
About 40,000 non-criminal immigrants with close family ties in the United States are expected to see their cases closed in immigration court in the coming months, which will likely delay their eventual deportation for over a year. Schumer is pushing for these immigrants to be granted a temporary legal status for that time, so that these individuals can work and pay taxes. Schumer also noted that this legal status would allow DHS and ICE to use their limited resources effectively, by minimizing the chance that immigration proceedings will be repeated for immigrants whose cases have already been closed.
“Given our scarce enforcement resources, it is critical that we prioritize the deportation of criminal immigrants, and de-prioritize the deportation of non-criminals with significant family ties and long time residence in the United States,” said Schumer. “For that small percentage of individuals who meet this criteria, it is only practical to provide them with actual relief that encourages them to contribute to the country rather than remaining in the shadows in a state of legal limbo. The administration should grant these individuals status for a period of one year, so that they can legally work and support themselves and their families while still residing in the U.S., all while clearing out courtrooms for higher priority criminal immigrant cases.”
In April 2011, Schumer urged DHS and ICE to use their limited resources to prioritize criminal deportations and de-prioritize non-criminal deportations, and the administration took that course of action in June 2011. Since announcing a plan to use prosecutorial discretion in non-priority removal cases, ICE has conducted pilot programs in the Denver and Baltimore immigration courts. Of nearly 12,000 removal cases combined, 1,667 were administratively closed for non-criminal immigrants with strong family ties, pending a background check. Nationwide, approximately 40,000 immigrants could see their cases closed in this way under the administration’s plans, and would remain in the United States for at least one year as the deportation of higher priority criminal immigrants is processed first. Schumer is urging authorities to allow this small group of immigrants to be able to spend this year in the U.S. in a productive manner by working and paying taxes.
Schumer was expected to present the letter to ICE Director John Morton in person at a meeting scheduled for Tuesday afternoon. Schumer stated that granting “deferred action” legal status after the administration closes a removal case would help to ensure that those same immigrants are not subjected to repeated court proceedings because their status cannot be verified. Without a legal status, even after an immigrant’s court case is closed by the administration, ICE could end up repeating investigations of this low-priority individual. Schumer stated that these duplicative investigations would be a drain on already limited federal resources, which should be directed at high-priority criminal deportation cases.
During its nine-year history, issues have arisen with respect to restrictions on counsel by the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration agencies. Tuesday, in response to calls from the American Immigration Council and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued immediate, comprehensive changes to their policies to ensure an appropriate role for attorneys in the immigration process.
Many noncitizens are forced to navigate the immigration process without representation because they cannot afford an attorney. But even persons who can afford one, or are represented by a pro bono attorney, have at times faced severe restrictions on their representation. This is particularly troublesome given the significant power USCIS officers wield. For example, they decide whether a noncitizen is entitled to stay in the U.S. or not. The assistance of an attorney well versed in the complexities of immigration law can help safeguard the rights of these noncitizens and ensure just outcomes.
By revising its guidance, USCIS has responded to some of the most serious access concerns. For example, the new guidance provides that an attorney generally may sit next to his or her client during an interview, may be permitted to submit relevant documents to the USCIS officer, and may raise objections to inappropriate lines of questioning.
The American Immigration Council looks forward to commenting on the new guidance and working with the agency to make sure it is followed. The other immigration agencies – Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement – should take note of USCIS’s commitment to improving access to counsel and take similar steps to recognize the meaningful role that attorneys play in protecting noncitizens’ rights.
To view the guidance see:
This entry was contributed by the American Immigration Council.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court made a landmark decision that upholds due process for immigrants in court. The decision means that any immigrant defendant has a right to be informed about whether or not a plea could lead to deportation.
From the Washington Post:
“The severity of deportation – the equivalent of banishment or exile – only underscores how critical it is for counsel to inform her noncitizen client that he faces a risk of deportation,” said Justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the opinion for the court.
The decision puts a new burden on lawyers to advise immigrant clients about the consequences of a guilty plea…”
Jose Padilla, the defendant in the case, had lived in the United States for 40 years as a legal permanent resident and was facing automatic deportation for a plea made in 2001. He was told by his lawyer that the plea would not affect his immigration status.
Yesterday’s decision ruled that:
“It is our responsibility under the Constitution to ensure that no criminal defendant – whether a citizen or not – is left to the ‘mercies of incompetent counsel.’”
This is a big victory for immigrant rights in the U.S. legal system, though it comes at the cost of thousands of deportations that should have been legally avoided.
For more on this decision check out:
National Public Radio: High Court: Lawyers Must Give Immigration Advice
The Detention Watch Network Blog
Change.org: Landmark Decision: SCOTUS Upholds Due Process for Immigrants
America’s Voice: Justice Prevails With Supreme Court Decision on Immigration Counsel
As I’ve mentioned before, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (and the Department of Homeland Security), are currently enjoying an unprecented and unregulated amount of power. As ICE raids spiral out of control and their victims face more and more injustice, more must be done to reign in the agency’s politically-fueled power trip. So, its great to hear that advocates are pursuing legal ways to hold ICE accountable:
A coalition of civil rights lawyers is suing federal immigration officials who have illegally failed to release information about reported racial profiling, intimidation and denial of access to counsel by workers detained during a huge workplace raid in Los Angeles.
On Tuesday, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the ACLU of Southern California and the National Lawyers Guild of Los Angeles filed a federal lawsuit asserting that the government’s lack of response violates the Freedom of Information Act. The three groups first requested basic information from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security nearly seven months ago. The government has failed to release a single document.
“The government has squandered an opportunity to allay community concerns about the manner in which it is conducting immigration raids. If the government truly believes that it is conducting these raids in a humane and lawful manner, it should release the documents this lawsuit seeks,” said NILC staff attorney Karen Tumlin.
We will be sure to keep you posted on any developments in this case.
Posted in legal news, Raids
Tagged ACLU, FOIA, freedom of information act, ICE Raid, national immigrant law center, van nuys raid
Standing FIRM
