Monday, August 31, 2020

The pandemic shows that now is the time to end immigration detention


Susan Akram on Open Global Rights argues that it is time to end immigrant detention:  "Immigration detention is rarely justified and now poses a greater risk to the public given the spread of COVID-19 in ICE facilities."  She closes:  "There is no legal or moral case to detain the vast majority of immigrant adults, let alone immigrant children. Ongoing immigration detention is an unreasonable risk not only to immigrants, but to the health of all of us."



August 31, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Advocates Challenge Visa Ban, Urge Judge to Curb President's Power


Courthouse News reports that attorneys argued for nearly four hours in federal court last week in a case that could decide the fate of thousands of immigrants shut out of the United States during the global pandemic.

The lawsuit challenges two presidential proclamations that closed the U.S. border to immigrants.  As described by Courthouse News, "[t]he first proclamation temporarily suspended the issuance of new green cards, while the second shut down the issuance of several types of nonimmigrant visas through the end of 2020." 

The White House claimed the proclamations were necessary due to the high unemployment rate brought on by the pandemic, but provided no data to support the claim. 

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta heard arguments on a motion for a preliminary injunction that argued Trump must justify that entry into the country by certain foreign nationals would be “detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

For a summary of the arguments, click the link to the story above.


August 31, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: What Should Immigration Law Become? by Geoffrey A. Hoffman


What Should Immigration Law Become? by Geoffrey A. Hoffman

This Essay will appear as a book chapter, in the forthcoming, A Life Dedicated to Family, Academia and Friends: A Festschrift in Memoriam and in Honor of Professor Stephen T. Zamora to be published by Arte Publico Press.


This Essay explores the future of immigration law and asks what it should become after the 2020 election. It begins with a discussion of some of the changes brought about by the Trump administration and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. In thinking about a starting place for immigration law, one can and should begin with human rights, ensuring international norms are met, providing the most vulnerable urgent protections, as well as responding to humanitarian crises. Simultaneously, immigration law can be viewed as a facet or subset of national security law, administrative law, or constitutional law, and at times all of these sources acting at once upon a particular immigrant or set of immigrants. This confluence of concerns drives the cacophony of voices, and hence the confusion and obfuscation which has frustrated comprehensive immigration reform and remedies for immigrants for decades. Other areas also of course impact the field. Another way of asking the same question is: How do we begin to explore imaginative possibilities at fixing the broken immigration system? In determining what immigration law should become this essay examines the possibilities inspired by three distinct “buckets” or categories: (1) Supreme Court decisions; (2) proposed and, thus far, unsuccessful legislation, including the immigration plan of candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden; and (3) remedies and approaches inspired by other fields of law. The Essay concludes with a discussion of legal analysis and a proposal for change.


August 31, 2020 in Books, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, August 30, 2020

Your Playlist: Steve Earle

Check out Steve Earle's City of Immigrants, which opens with:

Livin' in a city of immigrants
I don't need to go travelin'
Open my door and the world walks in

It might be a nice song to open the semester.


August 30, 2020 in Music | Permalink | Comments (0)

New Interim ICE Director

NBC News reports that Asian American advocates are criticizing the Trump administration's appointment of Tony Pham, a Vietnamese refugee, as the new Acting Director of ICE. Here's a quote from the article: "The Trump administration’s appointment of a Vietnamese refugee to lead Immigration and Customs Enforcement sparked anger among Asian American advocates, many of whom condemned the move as hypocritical. . . . During the Trump years, deportations of Southeast Asians have grown at an alarming rate. Pham’s nomination comes at a particularly fraught time for a group already reeling from the health and economic fallout of the pandemic. Earlier this month, ICE removed 30 Vietnamese Americans, including some refugees thought to be protected under a 2008 agreement between the U.S. and Vietnam."

The nonprofit organization Asian Americans Advancing Justice issued a statement on Pham's appointment, quoted in part below:

"Tony Pham’s emphasis on his family’s 'lawful path' to citizenship perpetuates an ahistorical and harmful narrative that ignores the harshness of our immigration system and dismisses the humanity of the millions of immigrants in the United States who are at risk of deportation. We reject this narrative. Tony Pham does not represent or speak for our communities, and his appointment as ICE Director in no way changes the fundamental cruelty of an agency that exists to criminalize immigrants. The United States must defund ICE and end the violence of deportation, and we will continue to fight for a future where our immigrant and refugee families can finally feel safe in their homes."



August 30, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

High-stakes, surprise naturalizations

Suketu Mehta, author of "This Land is Our Land: An Immigrant's Manifesto," penned a moving opinion piece in The Washington Post.  His focus is the unexpected naturalization ceremony that occured during the 2020 Republican National Convention. It was unexpected not only to viewers but to the unwitting immigrants who were taking their oath of citizenship while national television looked on. 

Beyond unexpected, the on-air naturalization raised concerns about the conflation of pageantry and politics once DHS employees were warned of a Hatch Act violation for engaging in partisan activities during their official duties. Apparently it raised concerns about the global pandemic as well. Mehta writes about the stakes for the soon-to-be-citizens:

“So the five — two of them Muslims, a group that their host, during his first presidential campaign, proposed banning from entering the United States — looked on, with an unsmiling bust of Abraham Lincoln as backdrop, and cheered. What choice did they have? It was a humiliating spectacle and physically risky, to boot — none of them had a mask on, and neither did any of the eminences present. The masks wouldn’t look good on TV; they would be off-message for a convention that is a celebration of, above all, the inalienable right of Americans to commit mass suicide.”

MHC (h/t Karthick Ramakrishnan)

August 30, 2020 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Guilty Plea in UK Human Trafficking Case Resulting in 39 Migrant Deaths


Human trafficking has human victims.  This week, a truck driver pleaded guilty to 39 counts of manslaughter in the deaths of 39 Vietnamese immigrants who were discovered in the back of a container truck last year in southeastern England.

The victims were found dead in the back of the truck parked in an industrial park in October 2019. The incident is one of the worst cases of human smuggling ever discovered in Britain . The victims, ranging in age from 15 to 44, were crammed into the truck in an effort to smuggle them into the country.


August 30, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Ex-DHS official regrets family separations. Now he's trying to stop Trump.

Video from ABC News

María Peña for Noticias Telemundo reports that Miles Taylor, a former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff, said Republicans like him should vote against Donald Trump in Election 2020.
Taylor has created the Republican Political Alliance for Integrity and Reform (REPAIR), in an effort to "repair" a party that, in his view, is divided between those Republicans who disapprove but remain silent out of fear, the few others who denounce him and those who cover for the President.

In an interview, Taylor said he regretted not previously denouncing Trump's family separation policy. Taylor worked under former Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, who was in charge of implementing the family separation policy as a tool to deter migration from Central America.

Officials have told NBC News that the Trump administration ignored warnings that it could be hard to reunite separated families. President Trump signed an executive order to reverse the policy, but privately he continued advocating for family separations, Taylor said.

“In private, he kept telling us. let's do it again, but do it bigger and harder. And in his mind, the purpose was to rip kids away from their parents," Taylor said of Trump. "Sickly, the president wanted to do it again, deliberately, to keep the kids away from the parents. That's one of the reasons I left this administration.”


August 30, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Saturday, August 29, 2020

Immigration Article of the Day: Crim-Imm Lawyering by Marisol Orihuela

image from
Crim-Imm Lawyering by Marisol Orihuela

This article was published in Volume 34, Issue 3 of the Georgetown Immigration Law Journal.


Lawyers seeking social change experience firsthand the significant overlap between criminal and immigration law. Today, a young criminal defense attorney will represent noncitizens charged with criminal offenses; determining immigration consequences for these offenses is a complex endeavor. That same lawyer may also confront mass prosecutions for immigration violations that force her to make immediate decisions about seeking release on bond, litigate motion practice, and enter into a plea agreement. If that lawyer chooses to work at an immigrant rights organization, she will likely advocate for limits on information sharing between criminal and immigration law enforcement agencies. The young lawyer will also develop immigration relief campaigns that require crafting a media strategy to support the campaign or choosing who to exclude from the benefits of any immigration relief legislation.


August 29, 2020 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Fact Check: Trump gives incomplete border wall update, misstates Biden's immigration plan


ABC News fact checks the president's immigration policy claims during his speech at the last night of the Republican National Convention.  The claims tested:

1.  Trump says US has built 300 miles of border wall

2.  Trump says Biden will stop deportations of undocumented immigrants, implement 'catch and release'

3.  Trump says special interests tried to stop 'pro-American immigration' policy



August 29, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

DACA recipients challenge latest Trump administration attempt to gut program

CNN reports that recipients of relief under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy created by the Obama administration are challenging the Trump administration's efforts to dismantle the policy.

In June, the Supreme Court in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California ruled the Trump administration's attempted rescission of DACA was unlawful.  

Within days of the decision, the Department of Homeland Security released the following statements:

Acting Secretary Chad Wolf: “DACA recipients deserve closure and finality surrounding their status here in the U.S. Unfortunately, today’s Supreme Court decision fails to provide that certainty. The DACA program was created out of thin air and implemented illegally. The American people deserve to have the Nation’s laws faithfully executed as written by their representatives in Congress—not based on the arbitrary decisions of a past Administration. This ruling usurps the clear authority of the Executive Branch to end unlawful programs.”

Acting Deputy Secretary Ken Cuccinelli: “The Supreme Court’s decision is an affront to the rule of law and gives Presidents power to extend discretionary policies into future Administrations. No Justice will say that the DACA program is lawful, and that should be enough reason to end it.  Justice Clarence Thomas had it right in dissent: ‘Such timidity [by SCOTUS] forsakes the Court’s duty to apply the law according to neutral principles and the ripple effects of the majority’s error will be felt throughout our system of self-government.’” (bold added).

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Wolf later announced that DACA renewals would be limited to one year instead of two and continue not accept new applications. 
In an amended complaint filed yesterday, several DACA recipients and Make the Road New York, an immigrant advocacy organization, challenged the latest directive "cruel, heartless, and unlawful," and urged the court to block the administration's effort to effectively end the program.  The complaint explains:
"Plaintiffs Martín Jonathan Batalla Vidal, Antonio Alarcón, Eliana Fernandez, Carlos Vargas, Carolina Fung Feng, M.B.F., Ximena Zamora, Sonia Molina, and Johana Larios Sainz (`Individual Plaintiffs'), on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated individuals, and Make the Road New York (`MRNY'), on behalf of itself, its members, and its clients (collectively `Plaintiffs' or `Named Plaintiffs'), bring this action to challenge the Trump Administration’s latest unlawful attempt to dismantle the DACA program and eviscerate its protections. The Wolf Memorandum violates the U.S. Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, and the Homeland Security Act, and must be set aside. So, too, must the implementing memorandum issued by Defendant Edlow (`Edlow Memorandum'), which violates the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act. The stakes cannot be overstated: over a million young people seek to live securely in the only country they know as home, and the DACA program properly affords them that opportunity, as well as the opportunity to work and support their families, and to travel for humanitarian, educational, or employment reasons. Plaintiffs therefore ask this Court to again enjoin the Trump Administration’s unlawful efforts to gut the DACA program."
Among the claims is that Chad Wolf's appointment as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security was invalid, thus making his policy memorandum invalid.  President Trump has tweeted that he plans to nominate Wolf to the position.

August 29, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, August 28, 2020

Heat Rays in Hands of Border Patrol? (Not an Onion Article)

I was taken aback by this recent Forbes article and related NYT coverage about a 2018 debate within the Trump Administration about allowing Border Patrol to utilize the military's Active Denial System (ADS) to thwart unauthorized migration on the Southern border of the United States.

ADS is technology that is mounted on a sturdy vehicle like a tank, humvee, or truck. It emits a targeted beam that is experienced as a heat ray. I'M NOT MAKING ANY OF THIS UP.

Back in 2014, the History channel did a short segment on ADS. I'll let them show you how it works:

So -- upside: non-lethal (though as Forbes reports, maybe not without side effects). Downside: HEAT RAY, begging the question what's next? An alligator-filled moat?

Apparently when a high-level official floated the idea of using ADS against migrants seeking to cross the Southern border of the U.S. without authorization, Kirstjen Nielsen said "she would not authorize the use of such a device, and that it should never be brought up again in her presence[.]"

Of course, Nielsen is long gone at this point. What will Chad Wolf do?


August 28, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2)

A nation of immigrants no more: How a second term could cement Donald Trump’s vision of America

Nicole Narea on Vox explored what a second term by President Trump would mean for immigration.  Expect more of the same and policy changes that will take a generation to undo.

Consider the future of DACA in a second term:

"[T]he administration could terminate DACA using the same method it employed in 2017, but with another, more thorough memo. That could throw into doubt the future of hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients, as well as the more than 66,000 people who have become eligible for the program since the administration stopped accepting new applications in 2017. Congress has struggled to pass legislation offering them permanent protections, which they have awaited for nearly two decades, and the administration has indicated it would deport them if they lose their legal status."


August 28, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: Resurrecting Animus/Renewing Intent  by William D. Ariaza

Araiza William

Resurrecting Animus/Renewing Intent  by William D. Ariaza, Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper No. 645


The Supreme Court’s decision in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, invalidating the Trump Administration’s rescission of the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, focused mainly on administrative law requirements of reasoned decision-making. Commentary on the case has also focused on that aspect of the decision. But a sleeper issue in the case is the Court’s rejection of the plaintiffs’ equal protection animus claim. Perhaps surprisingly, though, that rejection may well portend a revival of the animus concept that many had speculated the Court would abandon after its primary proponent, Justice Anthony Kennedy, left the Court.

This article considers what the Court’s treatment of the animus claim means for that concept. Part I provides the necessary background, tracing the Court’s engagement with animus from its early appearance in equal protection cases to its borrowing (by Justice Kennedy) into Free Exercise cases, and, with Regents, its return to equal protection. Part II argues that the Court’s very act of engaging the animus issue in Regents is significant, and establishes the viability of animus claims going forward.

Part III turns to the substance of the Court’s engagement with animus. It examines how Regents deployed the Court’s discriminatory intent jurisprudence in its treatment of the animus claim. It concludes that the Court’s connection of animus and discriminatory intent jurisprudence recalls the Court’s early understanding of the intent idea, before it rigidified into the familiar classification exercise we know today. If the newly-explicit connection the Court has drawn between animus and intent ends up influencing both concepts with insights from the other, then intent jurisprudence may be susceptible to a rethinking that hearkens back to the Court’s earlier, more contextual understanding of discriminatory intent.

Part IV considers the implications of this new connection. For animus doctrine, a new, explicit connection to discriminatory intent methodology places the animus concept on a sturdier doctrinal foundation. The influence of this connection on intent doctrine itself is more mixed, but intriguing. It may be that a new connection with animus will make it harder for equality advocates to prove discriminatory intent, if intent ends up being further suffused with notions of subjective ill-will. On the other hand, if the connection with animus results in a more holistic, less rigid intent inquiry, the way might be open for successful defenses of remedial race-conscious government action.

The connection Regents has drawn between animus and intent raises the prospect of renewing both concepts. But risks remain, and require careful monitoring of the use litigants and courts make of these renewed doctrinal tools.


August 28, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, August 27, 2020

Call for Papers: AILA Law Journal, Spring 2021 Edition


The AILA Law Journal has issued a call for papers for it's Spring 2021 edition.

Submission Guidelines: Articles should run 4,500–7,000 words, lightly cited. All articles must be original. However, authors and columnists may reproduce their articles and columns, and place them on their websites, with attribution to and after publication in the AILA Law Journal.

All articles must be submitted via email in Word, as an attachment. All charts, graphs, and, tables should be typed or professionally typeset and must be submitted via email. Articles should not use extensive endnotes. Do not put citations in the text; rather, use endnotes only.

Submissions should include a clearly written, short author biography, author address, direct phone number, and email address. Authors should provide a two- or three-sentence summary of the article. Articles should be written in neutral, third-person voice. “You,” “I,” “We,” and similar terms are discouraged.

Articles must appear as continuous prose, with full sentences. Excessive use of quotation marks should be avoided. They should not be used when referring to a few ordinary words of a speaker or writer. They are appropriate for coined phrases, but only those that are unfamiliar, and only on first reference.

Submission Deadline: November 15, 2020

Submit to:

If you have questions, contact Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, the Editor-in-Chief, or Danielle Polen, Editor, of AILA Law Journal (


August 27, 2020 in Conferences and Call for Papers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Karla McKanders on Racial Justice and Immigration


A new “Only in America” series focuses on racial justice and immigration.  In episode one, Ali Noorani,spoke with Professor Karla McKanders, who directs the Immigration Practice Clinic at Vanderbilt Law School and teaches refugee and immigration law, about the experiences of Black immigrants at the border, how segregation and policing impact Black and immigrant communities, and the need for nuance in our legal systems. Listen here.


August 27, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Legal Challenge to TPS Policy, Acting CIS Director Appoinment


CNN reports that advocacy groups are challenging in federal court a Trump administration policy that makes it difficult for Temporary Protect Status recipients in the United States from obtaining lawful permanent resident status.  In the suit, plaintiffs challenge the appointment of Ken Cuccinelli, who oversaw the policy change.  The nomination comes weeks after the Government Accountability Office concluded (and here) that Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Chad Wolf, and Ken Cuccinelli, the senior official now performing the duties of DHS deputy secretary, were not appointed through a valid process. 

The lawsuit argues that a policy change, implemented last year when Cuccinelli headed U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, was done without a rationale for the change, was motivated by animus against immigrants of color, and was carried out by an unlawful acting official.


August 27, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Profile of Venezuelan Refugees and Migrants in Latin America & the Caribbean



Over the last several years, Venezuela  has experienced a refugee crisis as hundreds of thousands have fled the country.  More than 4.3 million of the estimated 5.2 million Venezuelan refugees and migrants who have fled the turmoil in their country remain in Latin America or the Caribbean. While the movements have been widespread across the region, they are far from monolithic in their character.  A new analysis of data of Venezuelan refugees and migrants by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) through the Office of the IOM Director General’s Special Envoy for the Regional Response to the Venezuela Situation, reveals differing socio-economic profiles, living conditions and future intentions regarding settlement in the host country or onward travel.

Drawing on data based on government statistics, the MPI-IOM fact sheet offers a profile of Venezuelan refugees and migrants present in 11 Latin American and Caribbean countries during 2019, examining their demographics, education levels, employment before and after migration, remittance sending, health conditions and mobility patterns, among other characteristics.

Venezuelans who headed to Venezuela’s immediate neighbors—Brazil, Colombia, Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago—tend to have lower educational attainment than Venezuelans who move to other countries farther away, are more likely to be younger and single, and report more restricted access to health services and mental health supports. The majority expressed their intention to remain in those countries.

Those who traveled to nearby but not adjacent countries—Ecuador and Peru—also tend to be young, but more than one-third hold a technical degree or higher.

The final group, moving to destinations further away—Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, Paraguay and Uruguay—is older on average and reported particularly high levels of educational attainment, with half or more having a bachelor’s or master’s degree.

Across all 11 countries, respondents reported holding a variety of statuses, reflecting differences in their profiles as well as the diverse and largely welcoming policies that countries in the region have designed to address one of the world’s largest migration flows. Notable shares of Venezuelans in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay described having attained residency, asylum seeker or refugee status, while Ecuador appears to have the largest proportion of irregular migrants of the sampled countries.

Among other findings from the analysis:

▪    The median duration of respondents’ travel to their destinations ranged from 2 ½ months for trips to Colombia, Guyana and Peru to 7 ½ months or more for journeys to Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica and Paraguay.
▪    The challenges experienced during the trip that were most commonly reported across the 11 countries, in order of frequency, were lack of financial resources, food scarcity, lack of a sleeping place, insecurity, no transportation, issues with migration documents, lack of information and health concerns. In Guyana, 80 percent of respondents expressed concern about food insecurity, while 91 percent in Colombia experienced financial problems during travel.
▪    Significant shares of respondents in a number of countries surveyed reported access to health care: Brazil (87 percent), Chile (80 percent), Paraguay (61 percent), Costa Rica (59 percent) and Trinidad and Tobago (57 percent). In contrast, 62 percent in Guyana reported having no access.
▪    Few respondents said they intend to return to Venezuela; in every country other than Colombia, 5 percent or fewer indicated an intention to return. While 17 percent in Colombia declared they intend to return, 58 percent said they planned to remain in Colombia and 24 percent expressed a desire for onward movement. For the 10 other countries, more than four-fifths said they planned to remain where they were.
▪    Significant numbers report sending back remittances or other resources to dependents in Venezuela. Nearly three-quarters of respondents in Trinidad and Tobago, 56 percent in Ecuador and 53 percent in Paraguay did so. The proportions were smaller in Argentina (26 percent) and Costa Rica (21 percent).

Read the fact sheet, Venezuelan Migrants and Refugees in Latin America and the Caribbean: A Regional Profile.


August 27, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

NY Times Headline: "Trump Takes Night Off From Anti-Immigrant Talk to Swear In U.S. Citizens"


The Republican National Convention continues and President Trump has been re-nominated.  But we truly live in amazing times.  Having made a name with tough-on-immigration policies. the President appeared at a naturalization ceremony in the White House on day 2 of the convention.  Zolan Kanno-Youngs and Michael D. Shear for the New York Times reports "Five new American citizens were stunned to be naturalized at a White House ceremony during the Republican National Convention. Some said they did not know they were being broadcast until friends called to tell them."  The report continues:

"The president’s willingness to use the trappings of presidential power during a campaign convention was a striking departure from previous presidents, who avoided so blatantly blurring the lines between official actions and political activity. And Mr. Trump’s declaration that “we welcome five absolutely incredible new members into our great American family” stands in stark contrast to his anti-immigrant policies, often fueled by xenophobic language."

Tom Nichols for USA Today was not a fan:  "Trump's RNC naturalization ceremony at White House: Tasteless, hollow and probably illegal."  Fox News reports that "Democrats on the House Homeland Security Committee are requesting that the Office of Special Counsel investigate acting Secretary Chad Wolf’s participation in a naturalization ceremony . . . during the Republican National Convention. Wolf administered the oath of allegiance to five people -- from Bolivia, Lebanon, India, Sudan and Ghana -- as President Trump looked on."


August 27, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: Embracing Crimmigration to Curtail Immigration Detention by Pedro Gerson


Embracing Crimmigration to Curtail Immigration Detention by Pedro Gerson


Immigration advocates have long objected to both the constitutionality and the conditions of immigration detention. However, legal challenges to the practice have been largely unsuccessful due to immigration law’s “exceptionality.” Placing recent litigation carried out against immigration detention in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic within the context of the judiciary’s approach to immigration, I argue that litigation is an extremely limited strategic avenue to curtail the use of immigration detention. I then argue that anti-immigration detention advocates should attempt to incorporate their agenda into criminal legal reform and decarceration efforts. This is important for both movements. Normatively, immigration detention raises comparable concerns: Namely, that jailing people is, on the one hand an extreme and cost-ineffective form of social control, and on the other, a tool to marginalize or “otherize” entire communities. Furthermore, there is evidence that ongoing efforts to decarcerate states and localities may be foiled by immigration detention. To the extent, therefore, that decarceration is based on commitments to freedom or condemnation of the extensive use of carceral institutions, they are incomplete and even dangerous without including measures to address immigration detention. Immigration advocates, on the other hand, are more likely to succeed by placing the anti-immigration detention agenda within the scope of larger criminal legal reform than by pursuing either immigration detention reform or anti-detention litigation.


August 27, 2020 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)