Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Are Deportation Hearings Unconstitutional?: A View of SF Immigration Court from the East Bay Express

In this article published by the East Bay Express, Darwin Bond Graham (twitter: @darwinbondgraha) asks, "Are Deportation Hearings in the Bay Area Unconstitutional?"  The piece presents a series of case examples from the San Francisco Immigration Court (which is often seen as a more immigrant-friendly jurisdiction compared to other immigration courts across the country), and illustrates the problem with a legal system in which immigrants routinely to do not have lawyers.  These problems include individuals who give up their legal defenses out of desperation to leave immigration detention; the fact that the government is represented in every case (and the fact that the regular presence of a government lawyer in the courtroom allows for rapport-building opportunities between that lawyer and the immigration judge); and the variations in decisionmaking amongst immigration judges, particularly in asylum cases.

The article is a solid read and makes a good case for why universal representation programs, funded by local or state governments, could be a critical tool to restore an otherwise deeply flawed and broken immigration court system.

-JKoh

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2017/03/are-deportation-hearings-unconstitutional-a-view-of-sf-immigration-court-from-the-east-bay-express-.html

| Permalink

Comments

I hope this issue is addressed for the good of detained immigrants and American society at large.

Posted by: Reed James | Mar 8, 2017 5:20:45 PM

Post a comment