The Deal with Deporting Illegal Immigrants
The controversial deportation program also known as stipulated removal – which involves deporting illegal immigrants without due process – has already been abandoned by federal immigration officials in Arizona and in other participating states.
The controversy surrounding the stipulated program has since placed immigration officials and supporters of illegal immigrants’ rights at odds.
In an article that explores both sides of the issue, a spokesman for the ICE defends the program:
“Such agreements between ICE and the alien are advantageous to the government in that it relieves the immigration court of the need to have a hearing, saves ICE additional detention costs, and allows the alien to return to his/her country expeditiously.”
Jessica Vaughan from the Center for Immigration Studies also expressed her opinion against the program’s curtailment in favor of its expansion:
“Offering stipulated removal only to immigrants who hire their own lawyers bogs down the judicial process and defeats the purpose of the program: to quickly remove illegal immigrants with no legal grounds to remain in the U.S. who want to go home. It also clogs up immigration courts…
I see the greater use of stipulated removal as expediting the inevitable, with the result being swifter access to hearings for the people who are more likely to benefit from them.”
The program’s discontinuance has largely to do with how critics have reacted after seeing through and beyond what they deem as sanitized reasons presented by the ICE.
The National Immigration Center released a report accusing immigration officers of taking advantage of illegal immigrants who are mostly non-English speaking, intimidated, pressured, and generally powerless against the ‘hard-selling’ of their deportation scheme.
“Some of these non-citizens might actually have qualified to apply for lawful immigration status. Unfortunately, the documents reveal a government agency that is willing to cut corners around immigrants’ constitutional due process rights in the name of boosting deportation numbers.”
“The Obama administration should reconsider its detention practices instead of pressuring detainees to sign their own deportation orders.”
The Administration’s deportation program has since received flak for its alleged secretive operations and vague, conflicting purposes.
This has pushed ICE to come up with a new and improved approach:
“Illegal immigrants who do not have legal representation and do not want to contest their cases are given the option of attending ‘prompt hearings’. Held in front of immigration judges, the hearings ensure that immigrants facing deportation are advised of their ‘full array’ of rights under the law.
Immigration judges also confirm that the immigrants are aware of any possibility to legally remain in the U.S.
Only if the judge is satisfied that the aliens are removable under the charges filed against them, and are making a knowing and intelligent waiver of their rights, will the judge order their removal.”
While this new process has made the issue of deporting illegal immigrants sound less abusive and more civilized, there is still a long way to go with the issue of immigration.
Filed Under: Immigration Laws
