The Problem
With Immigration Courts |
For many
immigrants in the United States the Immigration
Courts are the only way for their case to be
heard and the only way for them to be granted
any sort of legal status. Recently, however, the
208 immigration judges currently practicing are
being brought under scrutiny, as they struggle
to complete 350,000 cases a year amid an
immigration debate that promises to increase
their caseload significantly.
Many organizations have conducted studies of the
immigration courts only to be shown shocking
results. For example, denial rates of asylum
cases from the 208 judges ranged from a low of
10% to a high of 98%. There has also been
extreme judge to judge disparity, and the
results of a person’s case most likely depends
on which immigration judge he is assigned to.
Some judges approve cases in so few instances
that attorneys actually advise their clients to
move to another state in order to obtain a
different immigration judge.
Critics of the immigration court system often
call it unfair and inefficient. A closer look at
the court system, however, can provide an
explanation for this. According to a New York
Times article, in order to maintain any sort of
orderly schedule, New York judges schedule 30 to
70 cases at a time, hold 4 contested hearings a
day and decide more than 15 cases a week, all
without law clerks, bailiffs, stenographers or
enough competent lawyers. Many people agree that
it is simply impossible for a judge to make
findings of fact and conclusions of law under
these circumstances.
After a decision is made by an immigration judge
either the alien or attorney for the government
may choose to appeal to the Board of Immigration
Appeals. However, with new reforms set into
place by former Attorney General John Ashcroft
board membership was cut to 11 from 23 and tight
deadlines were set in order to reduce a large
backlog. Since then it has become unlikely that
a case on appeal will be adequately reviewed,
and there is even less of a chance that a
decision of an immigration judge will be
overturned.
Additionally, in 2002, Department of Justice
issued a series of "Procedural Reforms" for the
administrative court that reviews the decisions
of immigration judges. This was also done in
order to decrease the backlog of immigration
cases that were pending. As a result of this
reform, the Board of Immigration Appeals has
issued thousands of single-member decisions (as
opposed to the traditional 3-member panel
decisions) without any written opinion. Before
the changes were instituted, 1 in 4 appeals was
granted. Now only 1 in 10 is granted. This has
profound consequences for immigrants and their
families.
Several organizations such as The Rights Working
Group and Human Rights First have been working
diligently to make changes to the courts.
Although unfortunate, unless significant changes
are made to the current immigration court system
and to the Board of Immigration appeals, it is
unlikely that any of these problems will be
resolved. |
|
|
