This Practice Advisory provides a general overview of motions to suppress, a tool used to prevent the introduction of evidence obtained by federal immigration officers in violation of the Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and related provisions of federal law. This updated version has been changed to reflect recent developments regarding the suppression of identity-related evidence, the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, and the impact of widespread Fourth Amendment violations.
Some African Americans have been fearful that the migration of our undocumented neighbors might have an adverse affect on their employment. The truth is, according to a May 2009 report from the Immigration Policy Center, there is no correlation between immigrants entering the labor workforce and the unemployment rate among native-born African Americans. Unfortunately, the unemployment rate in the African American community sits at 14.8%. This is due to broader macroeconomic developments, such as the loss of jobs in the auto and steel industries. We must work to address these issues head on, as opposed to using immigration as a scapegoat.
AILF and AILA Comment on EOIR’S Proposed Rule on “Streamlining” AILF and AILA’s comment on the proposed rule, “Board of Immigration Appeals: Affirmance Without Opinion, Referral for Panel Review, and Publication of Decisions as Precedents,” emphasizes the need for continued federal court oversight of the use of the “affirmance without opinion” procedure; it also objects to EOIR’s proposal to allow to permanent members of the BIA issue precedent decisions. The comment was submitted on August 18, 2008.
Timeliness of BIA Appeal
The LAC argues in this amicus brief that the Board has the authority to consider a late appeal in unique circumstances and that the failure of a guaranteed overnight delivery service to deliver the appeal on time constitutes a “unique” circumstance justifying acceptance of the late appeal.
Liadov, et al v. Gonzales 8th Circuit No. 06-3522
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
The LAC has long worked to protect the right to effective assistance of counsel in removal proceedings. Read more about our efforts at our Ineffective Assistance of Counsel advocacy page.
The Immigration Policy Center cites Margaret Stock, a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve, and a former professor at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, who said, ”In a time when several military services are experiencing difficulties recruiting eligible enlisted soldiers, passage of this bill could well solve the Armed Forces’ enlisted recruiting woes and provide a new source of foreign-language-qualified soldiers.”
For far too long, immigration courts have failed to provide a fair, efficient and effective system of justice for noncitizens in this country. Through advocacy and litigation, the LAC has urged the adoption of laws and policies intended to ensure all noncitizens a meaningful opportunity to be heard. The LAC also has issued a number of practice advisories regarding immigration court and Board of Immigration Appeals procedures.
Liadov v. Mukasey, No. 06-3522 (8th Cir. amicus brief filed Dec. 13, 2006) (arguing that the Board has authority to consider late-filed appeal in unique circumstances and that failure of a guaranteed overnight delivery service to deliver appeal on time constitutes such a “unique” circumstance). In a precedent decision, Liadov v. Mukasey,518 F.3d 1003 (8th Cir. 2008), the court denied the petition for review.
Comments to the Department of Justice/Executive Office for Immigration Review regarding the “Retrospective Regulatory Review” (submitted Nov. 27, 2012). The Council, in collaboration with AILA, urged EOIR to amend regulations pertaining to motions to reopen, stays of removal, bond hearings, telephonic and video hearings, filing and service of documents and decisions, and stipulated removal orders.Read more...
According to the Washington D.C. based non-profit Immigration Policy Center, when a person is arrested and booked into jail, "...his or her fingerprints are checked against the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program (US-VISIT), and the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT)...This fingerprint check allows state and local law enforcement and ICE automatically and immediately to search the databases for an individual’s criminal and immigration history."
When a match between the person and an immigration violation arises, the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) and local law enforcement are notified, and a "detainer" or an order to hold the person arrested is issued, giving federal authorities jurisdiction over that individual, according to the Center's fact sheet.
This issue covers a recently filed naturalization delay class action, a damages suit against USICE employees for violating 4th and 5th Amendment rights during home raids, and a recent decision regarding the confidentiality of asylum applications.