The Denver Post

New surge in child migrants renews focus on deportatio­ns

- By Mark K. Matthews

washington » As federal officials prepare for a new wave of child migrants from Central America— which includes the opening of a new, 1,000- bed facility in Lakewood— new statistics show that U. S. courts still are trying to process cases from the last major surge in 2014.

That year, an estimated 68,000 children — mostly from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras— were apprehende­d as they tried to cross the U. S. border illegally and without a parent.

Many of these cases remain under review, accord--

ing to federal records, and the backlog in immigratio­n courts could get worse as authoritie­s deal with thousands of new children who arrived at the end of 2015.

The federal system is “better prepared, but it’s not fully prepared,” said Wendy Young, president of Kids in Need of Defense, which helps migrant children get legal help.

Between July 2014 and December, the Executive Office for Immigratio­n Review said it received nearly 50,000 new charging documents formigrant children. During that period, however, fewer than 21,000 cases were completed.

Of those “initial case completion­s,” the decisions were a coin flip: About half the children were ordered removed from the country. It’s a system that immigratio­n attorneys said is often unfair and one that federal statistics show is burdened by demand and uncertaint­y.

For example, in 8,510 of the 9,695 removal cases— or 88 percent — the orders were issued in absentia, meaning the children weren’t at the hearing.

The fate of those children is often unknown.

Officials with the Executive Office for Immigratio­n Reviewrefe­rred those questions to theU. S. Department of Homeland Security, which did not return phone calls seeking answers on how many of those children were deported.

But federal authoritie­s defended the process.

“For an in absentia order of removal to be issued, the immigratio­n judgemust find that proper noticewas given and that the Department of Homeland Security has establishe­d removabili­ty,” wrote Kathryn Mattingly, a spokeswoma­nfor theExecuti­ve Office for Immigratio­n Review, in a statement.

Immigratio­n activists have complained the removal orders issued in absentia aren’t fair — because the children often are not ready.

Court statistics have shown a child’s chance to remain in the U. S. largely is dependent on whether he or she is represente­d by an attorney. Between 2005 and 2014, U. S. immigratio­n courts heard more than 100,000 cases of unaccompan­ied children.

The ones with a lawyer were allowed to stay nearly half the time. Those without anattorney­were toldto leave the country 90 percent of the time, according to federal records obtained by Syracuse University.

“Children who are represente­d by counsel are five times as likely to be granted some kind of status and remain in the United States,” Young said.

She added that child migrants are getting representa­tion about half the time, although she said she was worried a new spike in border crossings could have an impact. “I’m thinking the rate of representa­tion may drop down again,” she said.

Other statistics compiled by SyracuseUn­iversity show U. S. immigratio­n courts have struggled to meet the demand. As of December, there were nearly 470,000 cases of all ages pending in U. S. immigratio­n courts — an all- time high.

The wait is particular­ly pronounced in Denver, where, as ofAug. 31, the projected wait time was 1,988 days, the second highest in the nation.

One reason for the growing caseload was the flood of child migrants who arrived in 2014.

A new influx is raising concerns again.

In the last three months of 2015, authoritie­s stopped more than 17,000 unaccompan­ied children — more than twice the number they apprehende­d during that period in 2014.

The wave has compelled the Obama administra­tion to prepare three new shelters, including one in Lakewood that is expected to open in April.

The facility is prompting questions from local immigratio­n attorneys. Abbie Johnson, of the Rocky Mountain ImmigrantA­dvocacy Network, said it’s unclear what access to counsel that children in the facilitywi­ll receive at the center.

And while most of the children will be sent to relatives across the country — where their cases will be heard in local courts— she said she wanted to know what would happen to the children who aren’t connected with a relative or sponsor family, andwhether those cases would be heard in the busy Denver courts.

“I don’t think it will be a huge number,” Johnson said, “but it is also an unknown.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States