- The Washington Times - Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Federal agents will have to read a Miranda rights-style list of protections to immigrants before sticking them in fast-track deportation proceedings, according to the terms of a legal settlement announced Wednesday that will make it tougher for the Obama administration to quickly deport illegal immigrants.

Tens of thousands of immigrants previously already sent home could also apply to come back into the U.S. and plead with a judge to be allowed to stay — though immigration officials said the number that end up winning their cases will be small.

“This is a substantial reform of how Border Patrol and ICE do business,” said Sean Riordan, senior staff attorney for the ACLU of San Diego and Imperial Counties. “If the agencies implement the agreement fully, never again should families be driven apart based on immigration-enforcement practices that rely upon misinformation, deception and coercion.”

The agreement applies to immigrants who accept voluntary departure, which is a deal between the government and illegal immigrants. They return to their home countries at their own expense and without going through a full court proceeding, but also don’t suffer penalties associated with being officially deported.

Homeland Security officials said they don’t tolerate coercion or deception, but said the new procedures will ensure it doesn’t happen in either of the two agencies charged with immigration enforcement.

“In an effort to address the issues raised in this litigation, both agencies have agreed to supplement their existing procedures to ensure that foreign nationals fully comprehend the potential consequences of returning voluntarily to Mexico,” said Marsha Catron, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security.


SEE ALSO: Immigrant rights groups accuse Obama of ‘deportation mill,’ sue to stop removals


The full settlement still must be approved by a federal court, but the government has already committed to reading the list of rights to migrants.

Under the new procedures, agents will be required to provide — both written and orally — a list of consequences of taking voluntary departure. Immigrants will be granted the right to use a phone and will have two hours to decide whether to take voluntary departure.

The government must also maintain a toll-free hotline that gives information about voluntary departure, and will be required to let lawyers have access to immigrants in detention, the ACLU said.

Homeland Security officials estimate that about 30,000 immigrants were subject to voluntary departure during the period covered by the settlement. It’s not clear how many of them will qualify to petition to come back to the U.S., but the government anticipates it will be a small fraction.

The agreement stems from a 2013 lawsuit that argued the government was illegally pressuring immigrants to take voluntary departure, which means giving up their rights to make their case to an immigration judge.

Some immigrants choose voluntary departure because being officially deported or “removed,” in legal terms, carries stiff penalties such as a longtime bar from legally returning to the U.S.

Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, which was one of the plaintiff groups, said the new agreement will end “the cowardly practice of coercing immigrants” into accepting voluntary departure.

“Up until now, such a procedure became a de facto involuntary waiver of core due process rights for countless individuals who in a matter of hours sometimes were uprooted from their communities and expelled to their home country,” she said.

The settlement comes just as the immigration issue is heating up again in Washington.

President Obama is nearing a self-imposed deadline for taking unilateral action to try to halt deportations, and is facing pressure from immigrant-rights groups to go as broadly as possible.

Several Republicans, including Rep. Steve King of Iowa and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, have hinted in published interviews that if Mr. Obama does that, the GOP will use the upcoming spending debate to try to cancel those orders.

That sets up the possibility of another shutdown showdown, like last year’s fight over Obamacare.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the president won’t be bullied into forgoing his unilateral action by the threat of a shutdown.

“The president is determined to take the kinds of common-sense steps that are required to address the worst problems of our broken immigration system,” Mr. Earnest said.

He said blame for a shutdown would fall on the GOP.

Mr. King said if Mr. Obama does take executive action, it would be “nearly politically nuclear,” The Des Moines Register reported.

“I think the public would be mobilized and galvanized, and that changes the dynamic of any continuing resolution and how we might deal with that,” the congressman said.

The continuing resolution he referred to is a stopgap bill to keep the government open past the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year. Congress hasn’t passed any of the 12 annual spending bills required to fund the government, so a “CR,” as it’s known in Capitol Hill-speak, will be necessary.

Congress, which has the power of the purse, could include language in that CR to prevent the administration from carrying out its plans. But while the GOP might be able to push that bill through the House, it would find a tougher time in the Senate and an almost-certain veto awaiting from Mr. Obama.

If no funding bill agreement can be reached, the government would enter a partial shutdown.

Mr. Obama has vowed to make a decision on executive action at the end of the summer.

Copyright © 2016 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide