Law DHS draft proposal would speed deportations

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
The Homeland Security Department is weighing a plan to bypass immigration courts and remove undocumented immigrants who cannot prove they’ve been present continuously in the U.S. for two years or more.

The proposal is described in a draft regulatory notice, according to two DHS officials and a third person familiar with the planning. If finalized, it would represent the latest escalation of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Story Continued Below

The administration has considered since 2017 expanding a fast-track deportation procedure known as “expedited removal,” but thus far has refrained from moving ahead.

The draft notice — which remains under review — would increase significantly the number of recently arrived undocumented immigrants subject to rapid deportation. Under the current standard, expedited removal is applicable only to immigrants picked up within 14 days of arrival. The two-week cutoff stems from a 2004 regulatory change, not from the 1996 statute that created the process.

The change could speed up the deportation of recent arrivals at the border and reduce the load on federal immigration courts, which have grappled with a soaring case backlog. But such a move likely would draw legal challenges — and a number of Trump polices have been sidelined by federal courts.

The planned regulation also would remove a current requirement to apply expedited removal only to undocumented immigrants arrested within 100 miles of a land border, according to the two DHS officials.

Instead, expedited removal would be applied nationwide, the officials said — giving it the potential to sweep up undocumented immigrants in communities across the country.

The constitutionality of expedited removal has been challenged in federal courts. In March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that asylum seekers have the right to seek federal judicial review of an expedited removal order. That ruling conflicted with a 2016 decision by a separate federal appeals court.
 
Probably won't pass, but it sounds nice. The opponents of this thing just see racism, not the dangers faced by citizens and the immigrants themselves. Citizens face the threat of dangerous criminals, immigrants face exploitation under blackmail and debt prisons, but muh racism.

My best friend's wife is one of these dipshits who think if you're against illegal immigration then you must be a card-carrying member of the KKK. They'll call us racist all the while totally unflinched that a Guatemalan mom just hauled her baby through the entire country of Mexico on foot wearing the same diaper it had in Guatemala and half delirious with dehydration.

Then the RACIST Border Patrol will find it wandering around by itself somewhere around Arivaca, because mommy left it behind when she thought she was gonna get busted by Border Patrol on ATVs. Then we will feed and house this poor child for months trying to figure out where it's parents are.

Then we find mommy in a Texas jail for possession of meth.

A fucking system we should allow to continue or you're a RACIST white man afraid of losing your job.
 
Back
Top Bottom