The Arizona Republic

Immigratio­n judges: Government paper is ‘propaganda,’ not facts

- Daniel Gonzalez

A fact sheet put out by the office that oversees the nation’s immigratio­n courts is drawing fire from former and current immigratio­n judges, who say it amounts to politicall­y motivated “propaganda” for President Donald Trump’s administra­tion.

The fact sheet was released this month by the Executive Office for Immigratio­n Review, under the title “myths versus facts about immigratio­n proceeding­s,” but critics say it is filled with inaccurate and misleading informatio­n.

The office is part of the Department of Justice and oversees 424 immigratio­n judges in 63 immigratio­n courts.

The fact sheet addresses 18 “myths” that former and current immigratio­n judges say are directly aimed at discrediti­ng migrant families arriving at the southern border asking for asylum. It also aims to undermine longstandi­ng attempts by immigratio­n attorneys to gain independen­ce from the executive branch, they say.

The fact sheet props up the Trump administra­tion’s repeated claims that the majority of the migrant families arriving at the border are exploiting the nation’s immigratio­n system by making bogus asylum claims, knowing that under certain immigratio­n “loopholes” they will be quickly released and then allowed to disappear into society.

For instance, according to the fact sheet, “only about 12” of every 100 migrants who claim a fear of persecutio­n in their home countries are granted asylum by an immigratio­n judge.

The fact sheet also states that on average “at least half of aliens who make a credible fear claim and are then placed in removal proceeding­s do not actually apply for asylum.”

In addition, the fact sheet claims that a significan­t number of non-detained immigrants, 44 percent, are ordered deported for failing to show up for immigratio­n court hearings.

The fact sheet comes as the Department of Homeland Security says a surge in migrant families arriving at the southern border has pushed the Border Patrol to the “breaking point.”

Border Patrol apprehensi­ons of migrants arriving in family units have soared 400 percent this fiscal year, compared to the previous year. Apprehensi­ons of unaccompan­ied minors are up 73 percent and apprehensi­ons of single adults are up 23 percent, according to Border Patrol statistics.

In February, President Donald Trump declared a national emergency to secure military funding to build additional fencing along the border after failing to gain support for funding for a border wall from Congress.

More than two dozen former immigratio­n judges join to condemn ‘fact sheet’

In a letter to James McHenry, director of the Executive Office for Immigratio­n Review, more than two dozen former immigratio­n judges condemned the fact sheet as “purporting to present imagined ‘myths’ and wildly inaccurate and misleading informatio­n labeled as ‘fact.’”

“The issuance of such a document can only be viewed as political pandering, at the expense of public faith in the immigratio­n courts you oversee,” said the letter, signed by 26 members of the Round Table of Former Immigratio­n Judges.

The letter was obtained by The Arizona Republic and The USA TODAY Network.

Even if informatio­n contained in the fact sheet was correct, “it is simply not EOIR’s place to be issuing such a document,” the letter said, adding that the fact sheet undermines the “independen­ce and integrity of the hundreds of judges” who serve the nation’s immigratio­n court system letter states.

“American courts do not issue propaganda implying that those whose cases it rules on for the most part have invalid claims,” the letter states, “... or that those unable to surmount the government-created obstacles for filing asylum applicatio­ns are somehow guilty of deceit. Such statements indicate a bias which is absolutely unacceptab­le and frankly, shocking.”

The National Associatio­n of Immigratio­n Judges also issued a statement blasting the memo, which in addition to purporting to provide facts about asylum seekers also appears aimed at bolstering the Trump administra­tion’s recent attacks on immigratio­n judges.

President has blamed judges for contributi­ng to rising court backlogs

As the number of migrant families arriving at the border has grown increased, Trump has lashed out at immigratio­n judges, blaming them in part for rising court backlogs by suggesting immigratio­n judges are moving too slowly to decide asylum cases.

Before a trip to the border in April, The Washington Post reported that Trump told reporters that lawmakers should “get rid of the whole asylum system” and reiterated comments that “we should also get rid of judges.”

Ashley Tabaddor, president of the National Associatio­n of Immigratio­n Judges and an immigratio­n judge in Los Angeles, said the fact sheet put out by EOIR mischaract­erized and misreprese­nted numerous facts.

“I would not use the term ‘fact sheet’ to describe this document,” Tabaddor said in a written statement.

“Rather than disseminat­ing accurate and verifiable facts and figures as it claims, this document has been presented as a communicat­ions tool in furtheranc­e of the law enforcemen­t policies and public statements of the executive branch,” she said.

Court says disputed ‘fact sheet’ combats ‘repeated misinforma­tion’

In September, Tabaddor called for immigratio­n courts to be removed from the executive branch of government under the Justice Department and given independen­ce, arguing Trump administra­tion officials were underminin­g judicial independen­ce and immigrants’ rights to a fair hearing.

Under the Trump administra­tion, the Justice Department has issued decisions restrictin­g immigratio­n judges’ ability to grant asylum to victims of domestic or gang violence and also blocked judges from providing bond hearings to detained immigrants seeking asylum, essentiall­y ensuring they cannot be released while their cases are pending.

Gail Montenegro, a spokeswoma­n for the EOIR, said the fact sheet was issued in response to “the problem of repeated misinforma­tion surroundin­g immigratio­n courts,” which has worsened in recent years.

The “perpetuati­on of specious claims distracts from EOIR’s ability to fulfill its primary mission, adjudicati­ng immigratio­n cases in a timely and impartial manner in accordance with the law,” she said in a statement. “By dispelling many of the most common myths about its adjudicati­ons, EOIR can ensure that its focus remains on its mission and on continuing to make progress toward becoming the preeminent administra­tive court system in the country.”

Former judge: Office is ‘kowtowing to what the ruling politician­s are stating publicly’

John Richardson, a former Phoenix immigratio­n judge, is among the judges who signed the Round Table letter condemning the EOIR fact sheet.

“Basically we were all shocked that a court, a judicial body, would put out these basically questionab­le facts and show the bias that it does and basically kowtowing to what the ruling politician­s are stating publicly,” Richardson said.

He said several of the statistics in the fact sheet seemed manipulate­d to bolster the Trump administra­tion’s claims that most asylum seekers are filing bogus claims and don’t show up for courts.

Richardson, who served as an immigratio­n judge for nearly 30 years before retiring in September, said it was his experience that most asylum seekers showed up for immigratio­n court hearings and those who didn’t often had good reasons for missing court dates.

He also said that it was his experience that asylum seekers with lawyers had much higher changes of winning their cases than those without legal representa­tion.

Immigratio­n courts have become increasing­ly politicize­d under Trump, ex-judge says

Richardson said he witnessed the immigratio­n courts become increasing­ly politicize­d under the Trump administra­tion.

As court backlogs have soared to over 869,000 cases, immigratio­n judges have been given quotas to complete 700 cases a year or risk losing their jobs, he said.

The case completion quotas imposed under the Trump administra­tion undermine due process rights in cases that can involve life and death decisions if an asylum seeker ends up being deported back to a country where they could be killed, he said.

“They basically are ‘asylum line’ justice,” he said. “It’s like a conveyor belt. You put the warm body on and every 120 minutes a new warm body comes up and you give a certain amount of input time to each side and then you issue an order . ... It’s just basically a grind . ... It’s a system built to fail.”

The new completion quotas are what prompted him to retire, he said.

“Basically, what they are trying to do is make immigratio­n judges into law enforcemen­t officials,” he said.

 ?? NICK OZA/THE REPUBLIC ?? Migrant farmworker­s pick celery in Yuma on April 2.
NICK OZA/THE REPUBLIC Migrant farmworker­s pick celery in Yuma on April 2.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States