Home Page

Immigration Daily


RSS feed

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Seminars

CLE Workshops

Immigration books



VIP Lawyer Network


High Net Worth

Dubai Events

Campus Events

Overseas Events




Connect to us


Make us Homepage



ilw.com VIP

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
© 1995-
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal


  1. Detention center debate overshadowed by Trump

    by , 07-30-2015 at 12:47 PM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)

    "As Donald Trump's controversial remarks continue to bring immigration to the forefront, other aspects of the immigration debate are being overshadowed. Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, and Alina Das from the Immigrant Rights Clinic of NYU School of Law join to discuss." MELISSA HARRIS-PERRY 7/26/15
  2. Federal Judge Orders Release of Immigrant Children held in “deplorable conditions"

    by , 07-27-2015 at 09:05 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    United States District Court Judge Dolly M. Gee ruled late last Friday that the Obama administration's policy of jailing immigrant women and children in deportation internment camps is unlawful and breaches a 1997 settlement agreement that requires the government to minimize the detention of children, and that they are instead locking children in unlicensed deportation jails where they are exposed to “harsh, substandard” conditions and treatment.

    The Obama administration has been ordered to explain why the following remedies should not be implemented within 90 days of the Court's order. They have been given until August 3, 2015 to file a response.

    Here are the remedies ordered by the Court:

    1. As required by Paragraph 18 of the Agreement, Defendants, upon taking an accompanied class member into custody, shall make and record prompt and continuous efforts toward family reunification and the release of the minor pursuant to Paragraph 14 of the Agreement.

    2. Unless otherwise required by the Agreement, Defendants shall comply with Paragraph 14A of the Agreement by releasing class members without unnecessary delay in first order of preference to a parent, including a parent who either was apprehended with a class member or presented herself or himself with a class member. Class members not released pursuant to Paragraph 14 of the Agreement will be processed in accordance with the Agreement, including, as applicable, Paragraphs 6, 9, 21, 22, and 23.

    3. Accompanied class members shall not be detained by Defendants in unlicensed or secure facilities that do not meet the requirements of Paragraph 6 of the Settlement, or in appropriate cases, as set forth in the Agreement, in facilities that do not meet the requirements of Paragraphs 12A, 21, and 23. Defendants shall not selectively apply the “influx” provision of Paragraph 12C of the Agreement to house class members apprehended with a parent in facilities that do not comply with the Agreement.

    4. To comply with Paragraph 14A of the Agreement and as contemplated in Paragraph 15, a class member’s accompanying parent shall be released with the class member ina non-discriminatory manner in accordance with applicable laws and regulations unless after an individualized custody determination the parent is determined to pose a significant flight risk, or a threat to others or the national security, and the flight risk or threat cannot be mitigated by an appropriate bond or conditions of release.

    5. In consultation with Plaintiffs, Defendants shall propose standards, and procedures for monitoring compliance with such standards, for detaining class members in facilities that are safe and sanitary, consistent with concern for the particular vulnerability of minors, and consistent with Paragraph 12 of the Agreement,including access to adequate drinking water and food, toilets and sinks, medical assistance if the minor is in need of emergency services, temperature control,ventilation, adequate supervision to protect minors from others, and contact with family members who were arrested with the minor. Defendants shall file such proposed standards within 90 days of the date of this Order. Plaintiffs shall file objections thereto, if any, 14 days thereafter.

    6. Defendants shall monitor compliance with the Agreement and this Order and shall provide Class Counsel on a monthly basis statistical information collected pursuant to Paragraph 28A of the Agreement.

    Click here for a complete copy of the Court's order.

    In related news, a former employee at the Karnes, Texas deportation internment camp reveals that the medical unit was used as a way to punish immigrant mothers by isolating them from their children. It has also been reported that medical reports were falsified, and a psychologist acted as an informant to the Obama administration. The whistleblower described the abuse of immigrant women and children in the facility as being "tantamount to torture.”

    Updated 07-28-2015 at 08:14 AM by MKolken

  3. Ranking Democrat's Statement on Sanctuary Cities Bill

    by , 07-24-2015 at 09:38 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    July 23, 2015
    Ben Soskin
    (202) 225-1766

    Rep. Roybal-Allard Statement on Sanctuary Cities Bill

    Washington, DC Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-40), the Ranking Democrat on the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, issued the following statement today about H.R. 3009, the Enforce the Law for Sanctuary Cities Act, also known as the “Donald Trump Act”:

    “The recent killing of Kathryn Steinle in San Francisco is a tragedy, and my thoughts are with her family during this very difficult time. Unfortunately, the Majority has chosen to politicize this tragedy by bringing this misguided and unacceptable bill to the floor.

    “H.R. 3009 would withhold Department of Justice grants specifically targeted to enhance public safety, support community policing, and assist crime victims from states and law enforcement agencies that do not collect information regarding a person’s immigration status.

    “We can and should ensure that serious criminals who are enforcement priorities for ICE are not released from the custody of local law enforcement. However, it is misguided and counterproductive to force local law enforcement officers to inquire about a person’s immigration status at any time and for any reason in order to receive critical public safety funding. It is also wrong and irresponsible that this bill misrepresents the immigrant community as one comprised entirely of criminals. In fact, decades of research show that immigrants are less likely to commit serious crimes than native-born persons.

    “Earlier this year, many Republicans insisted that our Homeland Security Appropriations bill include anti-immigrant riders, and threatened to shut down the Department of Homeland Security if they did not get their way. Sadly, this bill is just more of the same from the Majority, who apparently think it is more important to incite hatred of our immigrant population for political purposes than it is to keep our communities safe and secure.

    “If we truly want to deal with our broken immigration system, we must pass comprehensive immigration reform that treats immigrants humanely, focuses on deporting those who threaten national security, and better secures our borders. Unfortunately, the House Majority has no interest in passing such reforms and instead chooses to rob local law enforcement of the money they need to keep our constituents safe from harm.”
  4. Obama Admin Deporting Children without Proper Screening

    by , 07-20-2015 at 10:20 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    The U.S. Government and Accountability Office (GAO) published a report on July 14, 2015, entitled Unaccompanied Alien Children: Actions Needed to Ensure Children Receive Required Care in DHS Custody.

    Among other things, the GAO found that the Obama administration has been deporting immigrant children without applying the required screening criteria prior to deportation.

    From the report's findings:

    Within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has issued policies and procedures to evaluate, or screen, unaccompanied alien children (UAC)—those under 18 years old with no lawful immigration status and no parent or legal guardian in the United States available to provide care and physical custody—as required by the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (TVPRA).

    However, CBP's Border Patrol agents and Office of Field Operations (OFO) officers who screen UAC have not consistently applied the required screening criteria or documented the rationales for decisions resulting from screening.

    Specifically, under TVPRA, DHS is to transfer UAC to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), but may allow UAC from Canada and Mexico to return to their home countries, that is, to be repatriated, if DHS determines that UAC (1) are not victims of a severe form of trafficking in persons, (2) are not at risk of trafficking upon return, (3) do not have a fear of returning due to a credible fear of persecution, and (4) are able to make an independent decision about returning.

    GAO found that agents made inconsistent screening decisions, had varying levels of awareness about how they were to assess certain screening criteria, and did not consistently document the rationales for their decisions.

    Click here
    to read the full 113 page report.
Page 1 of 171 1231151101 ... LastLast
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: