The current immigration removal system—from arrest to hearing to deportation and beyond—does not reflect American values of due process and fundamental fairness. In fact, the immigration removal system lacks nearly all of the due process protections that come into play in the U.S. criminal justice system.
With this in mind, we've created this resource page to draw attention to issues surrounding due process in the immigration system, including reports on the problems and flaws of the current system, as well as possible fixes.
Washington D.C. - A new report from the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), entitled Immigrant Legalization: Assessing the Labor Market Effects, yields both some enlightening and some potentially misleading results about the likely impact of a legalization program. Because the PPIC report focuses on legal status acquired under current immigration law, it does not reflect the long-term benefits and gains that follow from a comprehensive immigration reform package which includes legalization.
While the PPIC report dovetails with other reports when it concludes that legalization would not have a negative impact on native workers' wages and employment, their findings on the wages and mobility of the newly legalized differ from other academic studies on how immigrants fare after legalization. This difference can be attributed to the fact that PPIC looks at legalization only, and how the newly legalized are doing just 4-13 months after becoming legalized. Almost all other previous studies haven take a longer term view of their success.
PPIC relies upon data from the New Immigrant Survey (NIS), a sample of foreign-born individuals who acquired legal permanent resident (LPR) status between May and November 2003. It is important to keep in mind that the NIS is not representative of the unauthorized-immigrant population as a whole. As opposed to the individuals captured in the NIS, most unauthorized immigrants do not have a means of acquiring legal status. Moreover, individuals in the NIS were interviewed 4-13 months after acquiring LPR status.Read more...
Washington, D.C. - Today, more than fifty leading university professors urged Congress to pass the DREAM Act, noting that both their academic research and their work as teachers compelled them to speak out on behalf of the undocumented students whose future hangs in the balance over today's vote. These scholars, who have dedicated their professional lives to studying migration-related issues, noted: Read more...
Washington, D.C. - The American Immigration Council’s Legal Action Center (LAC) is pleased to announce the release of a new practice advisory: “Motions to Suppress in Removal Proceedings: A General Overview.” Long used in criminal trials, motions to suppress seek to exclude evidence obtained by government agents in violation of an individual’s constitutional or other legal rights. Though federal immigration officers often disregard immigrants’ rights, legal and practical obstacles prevent many individuals from challenging the procedures used to arrest them once placed in removal proceedings. By filing motions to suppress more frequently, immigrants will promote greater accountability by law enforcement officers and thereby protect the rights of other noncitizens.
For a complete list of all LAC Practice Advisories, please visit our website.
Washington, D.C.—Last week, the American Immigration Council’s Legal Action Center (LAC) filed a nationwide class action lawsuit against U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) in federal court in Seattle. The lawsuit alleges widespread problems with the asylum “clock”—the system that the government uses to determine when immigrants with pending asylum applications become eligible to obtain work authorization in the United States. The class certification motion describes the nationwide impact of these policies.
It sounded like a good idea. In this interactive age, the Department of Homeland Security wanted to take advantage of an easy way to get public feedback on its policies by implementing a Web-based system where users can share their opinions and ideas with the agency.
Updated Practice Advisory on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
Washington, D.C. — The Legal Action Center (LAC) is pleased to release an updated Practice Advisory, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. This Practice Advisory incorporates recent DHS guidance regarding fraudulent Social Security numbers, required evidence, and travel considerations for individuals who are requesting Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). It also offers strategic advice for attorneys representing individuals who may qualify for DACA. The LAC issued this advisory jointly with the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild.
For additional resources related to DACA, visit the Immigration Policy Center’s website.
For a complete list of all LAC Practice Advisories, please visit the LAC’s website.