Exclusive: Under Trump, prosecutors fight
reprieves for people facing deportation
Send a link to a friend
[March 30, 2018]
By Reade Levinson
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Trump
administration has sharply curtailed a once-common practice of granting
long-term reprieves to immigrants targeted for deportation, a Reuters
analysis of court records shows, adding to an already huge backlog of
cases in U.S. immigration courts.
The trend underscores how the Trump administration's broad crackdown on
illegal immigration has sometimes had unintended consequences.
Attorney-General Jeff Sessions had vowed to reduce that case backlog,
but the government's aggressive opposition to reprieves has caused the
opposite to happen.
Under a procedure known as “administrative closure,” judges can
indefinitely shelve deportation cases of immigrants who have lived
illegally for years in the United States but have not committed serious
crimes and have strong family or other ties in the country. The
immigrants are not granted full legal status and their cases can be
reopened at any time. In the interim they can remain in the country and
often are eligible to work legally.
The practice became more common after the Obama administration
instructed prosecutors in 2011 to prioritize immigration cases involving
criminals. Closures accelerated further after a 2012 decision by the
Board of Immigration Appeals, which gave judges additional authority to
close cases.
As a result, the number of shelved cases rose steadily for several
years. In the last year of the Obama administration, more than 56,000
such cases were closed, the Reuters analysis of court records found.
In the first year after Donald Trump became president, the trend was
sharply reversed, with about 20,000 cases closed, 64 percent fewer than
the previous year. (Graphic: http://tmsnrt.rs/2DKhoAJ)
Immigrant advocates say some of the most vulnerable immigrants - victims
of domestic violence and unaccompanied minors - could potentially be
deported even though they are eligible for a visa, because the courts
will not set their cases aside.
In January, Sessions announced he will review a recent decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals and consider whether judges should have
authority to close cases. He sought legal arguments from all sides as he
considers the matter.
In a December speech, Sessions skewered the Obama administration for
closing “nearly 200,000 pending immigration court cases without a final
decision” over a five-year period. “We are completing, not closing,
immigration cases,” he said.
About 542,000 cases were pending three weeks before Trump took office in
January 2017, according to a Department of Justice estimate. Since then,
the backlog has grown by another estimated 145,000 cases, a 27 percent
increase.
In comparison, the Obama administration added an average of 41,000 cases
to the backlog each year, according to data from the Transactional
Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a New York-based research
organization.
OPPOSING VIEWS
Trump was elected on a platform of tightening border security and
speeding the removal of people living in the country illegally. Early in
his presidency, he announced that all categories of immigrants in the
country illegally would be considered targets for deportation.
Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley declined to comment on
Reuters’ findings and on when Sessions might conclude his review of
whether judges can close cases.
Groups advocating stricter immigration enforcement have long opposed the
policy of administrative closure.
[to top of second column]
|
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Field
Office Director Jorge Field (L), 53, arrests an Iranian immigrant in
San Clemente, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy
Nicholson/File Photo
“We see this as one more example of attempts by the Obama
administration to work around the rules of law,” said Michael
Hethmon, senior counsel with the conservative Immigration Reform Law
Institute in Washington.
In a legal filing in the Sessions' review, the American Bar
Association cautioned that “withdrawal of administrative closure ...
would have profound and long-lasting consequences on the operation
of the immigration adjudication system and the lives of those who
must proceed through it.”
Supporters of the policy also say it allows judges to focus on cases
involving criminals and ones in which an immigrant has little
possibility of gaining legal status. They note that many of the
closed cases involved immigrants who had applications pending for
legal status, through asylum claims, marriages to citizens or other
means.
RUNNING FROM THE GANGS
After gangs shot her father, paralyzing him and placing him
permanently in a wheelchair, Jennifer Mendoza fled Honduras by
herself in 2016. She was 10 years old.
She was detained after crossing the border, placed in deportation
proceedings and held for four months at a facility for unaccompanied
minors in Texas until she could be reunited with her mother, Ruth.
The two applied for a U visa, which is granted to undocumented
immigrants who are victims of violent crime and who help law
enforcement try to catch the perpetrators.
In February this year, Mendoza moved to close her deportation case
while she waited for a decision on her visa. The immigration court
judge agreed, but the government lawyer objected and appealed. The
case is now pending at the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Mendoza’s lawyer, Vicky Dobrin, said the case shows how aggressively
the government is fighting closures. Prosecutors used to routinely
support closing cases like Mendoza's, said Dobrin.
“Within a few months they were starting to oppose everything,” she
said.
During the last four years of the Obama administration, prosecutors
appealed less than one percent of all case closures. Since Trump
took office in January 2017, ICE prosecutors have appealed decisions
to close cases 10 times more often, Reuters found.
Ashley Tabaddor, president of the immigration judges’ union, said
the pushback from prosecutors has meant more work for judges.
“The case is going to take much longer and is going to take more
resources,” she said.
(Reporting by Reade Levinson; Editing by Sue Horton and Ross Colvin)
[© 2018 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2018 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|