ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network




Connect to us

Make us Homepage



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

View RSS Feed

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

Only 1 in 6 Deportation Cases Benefiting from Prosecutorial Discretion

Rate this Entry

The Julia Preston of the New York Times reports on results of the pilot program in Denver for the new prosecutorial discretion memo. Of 7000+ cases in the Denver Immigration Court, only 1300 were deemed to qualify under the new memo. The article reports on frustration not only with the small number of cases covered, but also the failure to grant work authorization to many of the beneficiaries of the policy.

Preston also notes that many of the denied cases had no criminal issues. The denials stem from ICE officials deeming the individuals to lack substantial enough ties to the US. Given how subjective such determinations could be, hopefully USCIS will provide more guidance on this subject.

Submit "Only 1 in 6 Deportation Cases Benefiting from Prosecutorial Discretion" to Facebook Submit "Only 1 in 6 Deportation Cases Benefiting from Prosecutorial Discretion" to Twitter Submit "Only 1 in 6 Deportation Cases Benefiting from Prosecutorial Discretion" to Google Submit "Only 1 in 6 Deportation Cases Benefiting from Prosecutorial Discretion" to StumbleUpon Submit "Only 1 in 6 Deportation Cases Benefiting from Prosecutorial Discretion" to Reddit Submit "Only 1 in 6 Deportation Cases Benefiting from Prosecutorial Discretion" to Digg Submit "Only 1 in 6 Deportation Cases Benefiting from Prosecutorial Discretion" to

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags


  1. Jack's Avatar
    "If the only thing they did is enter illegally, they have established ties, they have U.S. citizen children, they are productive members of society, they have no criminal records, it makes prosecutors feel good when you know you can do something," Ms. Almeida [chief counsel for Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Denver, the senior prosecutor there] said. "They don't have to worry about someone knocking on their door."


    Boy, she sure takes the law seriously. When have you ever heard a prosecutor say something like that? Now the violator of the law can rest easy while he continues to reside in violation the law, presumably forever. Awwwww. So much for the only reason this review is being done is to alleviate a backlog.

    "The court review is part of a broad effort by the administration, as President Obama heads into his re-election campaign, to ease the impact of enforcement on immigrant and Latino communities"

    In other words, playing politics with the enforcement of law. Trying to get votes from a particular ethnic group is a proper reason to enforce or not enforce a law? Even LANLW and AV can't defend that, can they? So much for the legal principle of impartiality. Courts are just another tool to ensure reelection.

    Then again, how much respect for law would you expect from someone who would do all of this:

  2. Another Voice's Avatar
    Nice try Jack but let me tell you how it are good at twisting things but in the end it does not add up.

    Point 1: You claim that this is defacto amnesty.

    Fact: Is not, Amnesty is when the violation is forgiven and you are granted permanent status. In this case as the header states. Only 1/6 cases gets closes and no legal status is given not exactly the same. Excuse not sufficient ties to the country even if there are no criminal grounds to deny prosecution discretion, so in essence ALL THINGS REMAIN EQUAL.

    Point 2: Equal protection under the law.
    From the NY Times article.
    "Despite the immense workload, prosecutors said they liked their newfound flexibility in pursuing cases -- more like the routine practice of their peers in criminal courts." Now would you say that in America there is a culture of amnesty because criminal prosecutors engage in PROSECUTION DISCRETION. If so what happen to all those law breakers where is your hard *** attitude towards them.

    Point 3: Politics, the decision makers are in fact politicians and that is the name of the game. The fact that both parties need to gain voters from the fastest growing minority in the country to get to powers is a big afrodisiac for these guys......and as always Jack just because a law is in the books does not mean is perfect in fact many of the are stupid and outdated. It is SMART to acknowledge that and given the political climate use your DISCRETION granted in the constitution to make small changes to make the government work better for the people.
  3. George's Avatar
    People like Jack who keep saying that the American people want less immigration, illegal or otherwise, lost big yesterday in SC. I really dont give a damn what Americans think. But, I do give a damn what Americans do. Yesterday's decisive victory by Newt Gingrich in a state where so called Christians are more concerned about preserving the white skin than redeeming the sin, clearly indicates that either immigration, illegal or otherwise is a very minor issue for SC residents or they clearly want amnesty. Newt is the only guy so far who has stood up for amnesty....

    And yet he won. This was an issue that was addressed in the last debate. Rick Santorum clearly wanted to cut legal immigration as well. There were several anti-immigration groups including Numbers USA which ran anti-legal immigration commercials. But, Santorum got no traction. It was the pro-amnesty Gignrich that won decisively in a decidedly redneck state which produced DeMint. Did the SC white evangelicals endorse Gingrich morals and lifestyle? May be. Did they endorse his policies? Likely. Anyhow he won. So dont come to me with a poll saying folks in SC want legal and illegal immigration reduced. By voting for Gingrich they have made it clear that this is not an issue with them or they endorsed his amnesty plan. If the white skin worshippers want less immigration they can always vote for Santorum. They have not and let us see what happens in Florida and beyond. Until then dont confuse me with immigration attitude polls. It is the leaders people elect after clearly stating their views is what I am interested in. Yesterday, whether they like it or not, the GOP voters in one of the most racist states in the country voted for amnesty seeking Gingrich...the antis like Jack and Numbers USA lost, fair and square. QED. End of story!
  4. Jack's Avatar
    "the pro-amnesty Gignrich"

    If you've been continuously present for 25(!) years and only if approved by a local citizen review panel. And if you go to church?

    Then there's this:

    "I want to make the point, on the very first day that I'm inaugurated, I will issue an executive order to the Justice Department to drop the lawsuits against South Carolina, Alabama and Arizona," Gingrich said during the CNN debate. "The federal government should enforce the law, not stop states from helping it enforce the law."

  5. George Chell's Avatar
    "If you've been continuously present for 25(!) years and only if approved by a local citizen review panel. And if you go to church?"

    He will provide amnesty at the federal level while allowing the state to enact their own laws. However, once amnesty is provided by the feds, state laws cannot do anything. He is pro-amnesty, period and the people of SC voted for him. He said so in the debate..that he is is not that the people of SC did not know. Public Policy Polling which has been the most accurate so far is tweeting today that Florida is too close to call...his amnesty will sell well with the Hispanics in Southern Florida and his anti-gay and anti-abortion stance will sell well with the anti-amnesty rednecks who are not very bright to take a look at the other candidates in the race. I really dont care what Americans tell. I deduce what Americans think of amnesty and other immigration issues by the type of candidates they select...and they selected a pro-amnesty guy over no amnesty Romney and reduce legal immigration Santorum. So unless something changes drastically dont confuse me with polls that show Americans are opposed to legalization and want immigration reduced. Some concrete results please!

  6. George Chell's Avatar
    If Charles "the ***" Grassley thinks that a prospective immigrant kicked out of America means one more job for America, think again....,14513.html

    Will these guys ever learn or are they hell bent on destroying Social Security and Medicare through lower tax collections? 687,000 jobs. Assuming each of them would have paid an average of $70,000 a job, it is a loss of $7.4 billion in social security and medicare revenues. This brings me to the conclusion that Charles Grassley along with other Republicans like Jeff Sessions, Michelle Bachmann and even Rick Santorum are hell bent on destroying Social Security and Medicare through lower tax intake. How best to do this than drive jobs abroad? right?
  7. Another Voice's Avatar
    Jack I think your folks are losing it.....LOL!! Self-deportation yeah, I am sure it will happen, let's just sit here and wait. I think this guy needs to learn the meaning of the work denial!!

    Mitt Romney Attempts To Soften Dream Act Stance, Says He'd Rely On 'Self-Deportation'
  8. George Chell's Avatar
    Romney has to say me-too. Too many Hispanics in Florida. Right now Gingrich is leading by telling the white rednecks that he is with them on abortion, gay marriage etc. and even to preserve their inbred racial purity while he tells the Hispanics he is for amnesty. All they want to do is arm the illegals and send them to war.
  9. Gg's Avatar
    Time for DREAM ACT PLUS +++
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: