(This article was written by Ariana Figueroa of the non-profit States Newsroom DC Bureau & is republished by US Border News with permission under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.)
An appeals court on Tuesday cleared the way for the Trump administration to use fast-track deportations within the interior of the country and not just at the Southern border, a key pillar in the president’s mass deportation campaign.
The 2-1 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia means the Department of Homeland Security can continue with an expanded use of expedited removal after lower courts blocked the policy over concerns that immigrants were not receiving due process.
Last year, the Trump administration expanded the use of expedited removal to apply to immigrants in the interior of the United States who cannot prove they have remained in the country for more than two years, greatly expanding the number of migrants affected. Previously, the policy applied only to migrants at the Southern border, rather than those in the interior of the country.
Tuesday’s ruling, by Judge Justin R. Walker, argued that Congress allowed the executive branch to decide when to apply an expedited removal policy to immigrants. President Donald Trump appointed Walker, along with Judge Neomi Rao, who also ruled in favor of the government.
They found in addition that the Trump administration’s policy did not violate the due rights of immigrants. The judges vacated lower court decisions that blocked the Trump policy.
No immigration judge
The expanded policy allows the removal of some immigrants – sometimes within hours – without an appearance before an immigration judge, which is key to the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign.
Judge Robert L. Wilkins disagreed and said he would have kept the lower court’s decision in place that blocked the policy. Former President Barack Obama nominated Wilkins.
In a statement, James Percival, the Department of Homeland Security’s general counsel, praised the appeals court ruling.
“For years, DHS has arbitrarily limited expedited removal to 14 days even though it applies to illegal aliens who entered the country illegally within the last two years,” Percival said. “Today, the DC Circuit vindicated our decision to apply the law as written.”
Due process questions
In December, the Department of Justice argued that due process is not guaranteed for immigrants in a fast-track deportation.
The immigrants’ rights group that sued the Trump administration, Make the Road New York, contended that the expanded policy did not give adequate notice to immigrants and that immigration officials did not provide proper information to an immigrant who may or may not fall under the policy.
Walker wrote that a notice of removal was satisfactory and that an immigration official notifying a migrant if they fall under the policy would be akin to providing them with legal counsel.
“Make the Road’s contrary reasoning would require immigration officers to provide what amounts to legal advice,” Walker wrote. “If due process requires the government to inform individuals of the two-year continuous-presence rule, it presumably also requires informing them of every other basis for contesting expedited removal.”
Wilkins, in his dissent, argued that immigration officials should inquire about how long an immigrant has been in the country before making a decision if expedited removal should be applied.
“A procedure that can result in persons being deported pursuant to the expedited removal statute without even being asked how long they have been in the country might satisfy due process for persons encountered at the border, but it is woefully inadequate for persons encountered in the interior of the country,” Wilkins wrote.
Make the Road New York did not immediately respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.
(This article was originally published by the DC Bureau of the States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization, and is republished by US Border News with permission.)
What are your thoughts on the Appeals Court ruling?
Share your opinion in a comment to this story!
Abrazos,
Jack Beavers
Click the button above to add US Border News as a preferred source in your Google News Feed.
Jack, this is the correct way to deport illegal people immediately. We have many friends who immigrated legally. It's difficult to become a USA citizen. They have to learn English and study daily. Our friends that immigrated legally are furious with illegal migration. They are really P. Off. Thank you Jack for your service to us Patriots.
BTW how are you doing with your recovery from injury? You have been in my daily prayers.