Immigration courts

ICE deportation reviews by the numbers, explained

Photo by olongapowoodcraft/Flickr (Creative Commons)

The review of some 300,000 deportation cases in the nation’s backlogged immigration courts recently led to some confusing headlines after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced that about 16,500 pending cases would be temporarily put on hold, which some translated into these cases being “shelved.”

But that’s not exactly how it works. As the review process continues, there are no guarantees for those so far deemed eligible for relief. And even for the few spared removal to date, the future is uncertain.

Here’s some of the recently released ICE data on the deportation reviews, followed by an explanation of what it means. From ICE:

• In total, ICE has reviewed 219,554 pending cases with approximately 16,544, or 7.5%, identified as amenable for prosecutorial discretion as of April 16, 2012.

What it means: The agency has identified this many cases as being eligible for prosecutorial discretion, the guidelines for which were established by federal officials last year. The “low priority” immigrants defined in the guidelines include people who have a clean record, have close ties to the United States, have lived in the U.S. since they were minors, have served in the military or are part of a military family, have or are attempting a college education, and so forth.

But these 16,544 cases have only been identified as meeting the criteria for prosecutorial discretion. While it’s good news for those identified as eligible, there are still hoops for them to jump through, such as producing additional documentation and background checks. These cases could be at any stage in the process, and not all will make the cut. ”These cases have not been suspended,” ICE spokeswoman Barbara Gonzales clarified by phone.

Of the eligible cases identified, just a small fraction so far have been administratively closed.

Continue reading →

FILED UNDER: Deportation reviews, ICE, Immigration courts, Prosecutorial discretion, TRAC, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

December 19, 2011 | 10:50 AM | By Leslie Berestein Rojas

Read the report: Immigrants in deportation not getting adequate legal assistance

Photo by s_falkow/Flickr (Creative Commons)

A new report from the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York details a troubling finding: Of the immigrants being represented by attorneys in deportation proceedings, a large percentage aren’t getting what even judges consider adequate representation.

Titled “Accessing Justice,” the study from the law school at Yeshiva University in Manhattan takes in immigration cases in New York, with input from the judges who hear these cases. From a New York Times story:

Immigrants received “inadequate” legal assistance in 33 percent of the cases between mid-2010 and mid-2011 and “grossly inadequate” assistance in 14 percent of the cases, the judges said.

They gave private lawyers the lowest grades, while generally awarding higher marks to pro bono counsel and those from nonprofit organizations and law school clinics.

While only New York cases were examined, the study’s implications apply to the immigration caseload in similarly large cities like Los Angeles, where immigrants are subject to predatory representation not only from unscrupulous attorneys who may not have the necessary background, but from unqualified non-lawyer notaries. From the report introduction:

Compounding the lack of legal entitlement to appointed counsel are the distinctive characteristics of the population facing removal: a relative lack of familiarity with the legal system; lack of financial resources; language barriers; and general susceptibility to unscrupulous lawyers. In addition, immigrant representation, to date, has not been considered to be within the mandate of the various governmental and institutional actors that would otherwise be responsible for providing indigent civil legal services. As such, we now find ourselves in a place where no sizeable entity – government or otherwise – views providing or funding removal-defense services as its primary responsibility.

The entire report can be viewed here.

FILED UNDER: Politics/Justice, Benjamin Cardozo School of Law, Cardozo Law Review, Immigration courts

July 28, 2011 | 11:19 AM | By Leslie Berestein Rojas

Longer immigration court wait times, with especially long waits in L.A.

Source: Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse

The time it takes for immigration courts to decide cases continues to stretch, with average wait times getting longer by the year lately, according to a new report. And longest waits are in Los Angeles.

This is according to federal data obtained by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University in New York, which keeps tabs on federal enforcement spending.

According to the report released today, average immigration court wait times grew longer during the first six months of federal fiscal year 2011, which began last Oct. 1. During this time the average wait for an immigrant’s case to be decided reached 302 days, a jump of 7.5 percent in the last six months and almost 30 percent higher than the average time it took in FY 2009.

Some courts have far worse backlogs than others. From the report:

During the first six months of FY 2011, the court with the longest overall decision time was Los Angeles, where cases averaged 745 days to decide. The New York court posted the second longest decision time of 646 days, followed by Philadelphia where cases averaged 600 days to decide. The Phoenix court was fourth (583 days) while the Portland court was fifth (531 days).

The same five courts had the longest average decision times for cases resulting in removal orders. However, their order was slightly different: New York (602 days), Los Angeles (532 days), Portland (521 days), Phoenix (464 days), and Philadelphia (440 days).

The length of time immigrants must wait varies by their country of origin. Particularly in deportation cases, different countries have different rules determining which deportees they take back, if any, and this affects wait times. From the report:

Among nationalities, and limiting comparisons to the 50 countries with the most cases decided during the first half of FY 2011, Armenians currently had the longest decision times averaging 955 days – more than three times the national average of 302 days. Other nationalities within the top five for their overall average decision times were Indonesia (930 days), China (691 days), Bangladesh (685 days), and Mali (682 days).

The top 50 nationalities with the most cases that had the fastest average decision times were: Mexico (173 days), Honduras (217 days), Cuba (230 days), Canada (264 days), and Costa Rica (279 days).

The amount of time it takes for the Executive Office for Immigration Review to decide an immigrant’s fate is often reflected in how much time that person spends in immigrant detention, though some of the shortest waits posted were in detention center courts. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement records through late May show that the average length of stay in immigrant detention has dropped since 2007, as the Obama administration has carried out a record number of deportations in the past couple of years.

However, the bulk of these removals are to Mexico, the country whose nationals spend the least amount of time on average waiting for an immigration court decision.

FILED UNDER: Health/Education, EOIR, Executive Office for Immigration Review, ICE, Immigrant detention, Immigration courts, Record deportations, Syracuse University, TRAC, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement