Source: http://crimmigration.com/2013/02/20/obama-immigration-plan-is-mixed-bag/?replytocom=82431
Timestamp: 2020-04-10 09:00:05
Document Index: 378513718

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 135', '§ 287', '§ 136', '§ 122', '§ 122', '§ 122', '§ 122', '§ 122', '§ 124', '§ 123', '§ 123', '§ 155', '§ 158', '§ 162', '§ 122', '§ 122']

Obama immigration plan is mixed bag
The Obama Administration’s draft immigration proposal would expand features of immigration law that have been at the core of its enforcement policies for years while severely limiting some excesses of contemporary immigration law. This is a quick review of some of the draft’s major crImmigration-related provisions, touching on immigration detainers, the definition of “aggravated felony” and “conviction,” cancellation of removal, proceedings against mentally incompetent individuals, appointment of counsel, and immigration court operations.
It comes as no surprise that the president’s draft legislation, leaked by the Miami Herald this week, would give DHS more authority to detain noncitizens who have encountered the criminal justice system. One section would authorize DHS to continue to operate the Institutional Removal Program, a method of speeding up removal of people incarcerated after having been convicted of a crime, and also allow the department to develop other programs that do much the same thing. Title I—Enforcement § 135.
Reflecting one of the Administration’s preferred enforcement tactics, the proposal would expand DHS’s statutory authority to issue detainers. Currently, the INA allows DHS to issue an immigration detainer only when police have reason to believe that the arrested person is not authorized to be present in the USA and the noncitizen was “arrested…for a violation of any law relating to controlled substances….” INA § 287(d). Importantly, the INA requires that the arresting police agency request the detainer. DHS is not statutorily allowed to issue a detainer on its own initiative. As Chris Lasch (University of Denver) has written (here, here, and here), the detainer regulations used by the former INS and now DHS readily exceed the statute’s “narrow scope.” Christopher N. Lasch, Federal Immigration Detainers After Arizona v. United States, 46 Loyola L.A. Law Review 1, 82 (forthcoming 2013).
The president’s proposal would bring the INA up to par with immigration officials’ practice. First, it would allow DHS to issue a detainer without waiting for a request from the local police. Second, it would allow a detainer to be lodged against a person whom immigration officials “ha[ve] reasonable suspicion…is subject to removal” for any reason. Title I—Enforcement § 136. In an obvious attempt to clear up some of the ambiguity about detainers that currently exists, the proposal also explains that a detainer is merely a “request[]” that the local police agency hold on to the named individual.
None of this should be news to anyone who has watched the Obama Administration enforce immigration laws. It has made unprecedented use of its detention power and repeatedly announced that it is focused on removing individuals who have come into contact with criminal justice authorities. Though Administration officials tend to imply that these are truly dangerous individuals, the reality is much different. These amendments reflect the reality more than they do the rhetoric.
I was much more surprised by the proposal’s attempts to narrow the definition of several types of aggravated felonies. According to the leaked text, a “crime of violence,” theft, burglary, obstruction of justice, perjury, and passport fraud, among other offenses, would be considered aggravated felonies only if they resulted in a term of imprisonment of more than 5 years as opposed to the one-year term currently required. Title I—Enforcement § 122. Anyone convicted of an offense that involves fraud or deceit involving a loss to the victim in excess of $100,000 instead of the current $10,000 threshold would be considered an aggravated felon. Title I—Enforcement § 122.
In addition, anyone convicted of failure to appear for a court hearing would need to be sentenced to more than 5 years imprisonment to be considered an aggravated felon rather than the current two-year requirement. Title I—Enforcement § 122. This section would also require that smuggling people into the country be “committed for purpose of commercial advantage” in order to constitute an aggravated felony; there is currently no such requirement. Title I—Enforcement § 122.
On a similar note, LPRs would be ineligible for cancellation of removal only if they were convicted of an aggravated felony “for which the alien has been sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of at least 5 years.” Title I—Enforcement § 122. A separate section would change the hardship requirement necessary to obtain non-LPR cancellation of removal to “extreme” hardship from “exceptional and extremely unusual” hardship. Title I—Enforcement § 124.
President Obama’s draft proposal would also alter the definition of “conviction” used for immigration law purposes. First, it would clarify that a conviction becomes final only once all direct appeals end, whether through waiver or because the process has run its course. Title I—Enforcement § 123. Second, the proposed amendment would prohibit DHS from using a “dismissed, expunged, deferred, annulled, invalidated, withheld, or vacated” judgment as the basis for removal. Title I—Enforcement § 123. Such judgments would no longer be deemed convictions for immigration law purposes, bringing the immigration law definition in line with most state criminal law definitions. In addition, the proposal would not allow the portion of a sentence that is suspended to be considered as part of the term of imprisonment or sentence used for any immigration law purpose—for example, to determine whether someone has been sentenced to 5 years imprisonment.
More indirectly related but no less important, the president’s draft legislation would also improve how immigration courts and the BIA operate. One hundred forty new IJs would be hired by fiscal year 2016 and 90 new staff attorneys at the BIA, according to the proposal. Title I—Enforcement § 155.
Meanwhile, the IJs would receive unreviewable discretionary authority to appoint counsel for people in removal proceedings, and would be required to appoint counsel for unaccompanied minors and mentally incompetent individuals. Title I—Enforcement § 158. DHS would be required to pay for mental competency assessments by an IJ-appointed psychiatrist or psychologist, and IJs would be required to terminate proceedings against any mentally incompetent individual “if the alien’s proceedings cannot be made fundamentally fair.” Title I—Enforcement § 162.
Posted by César on February 20, 2013 on 9:00 am 27 Comments
Filed Under: aggravated felony, commentaries, conviction, detainer
Wow! “I was much more surprised by the proposal’s attempts to narrow the definition of several types of aggravated felonies. According to the leaked text, a “crime of violence,” theft, burglary, obstruction of justice, perjury, and passport fraud, among other offenses, would be considered aggravated felonies only if they resulted in a term of imprisonment of more than 5 years as opposed to the one-year term currently required. Title I—Enforcement § 122. Anyone convicted of an offense that involves fraud or deceit involving a loss to the victim in excess of $100,000 instead of the current $10,000 threshold would be considered an aggravated felon. Title I—Enforcement § 122.” This is welcome news.
this is real says
Thanks for some other informative blog. Where else may I am getting that kind of info written in such a perfect way? I’ve a challenge that I am just now working on, and I’ve been at the look out for such info.|
M.Ahmad says
I agree with president it makes sense, thing called rehabilitation, second chance in life, at the same I think it makes sense to have Judges make the decisions on case by case for relief from deportations instead of placing everyone in the same category, for example shoplifting vs armed bank robbery how do you penalize two different crimes with same harsh punishment, its called fairness so let the judges decide on case by case on who stays and who goes
tree removal service in 94948 says
tree removal service in 94948
crImmigration.com: Obama immigration plan is mixed bag
McKinney tree removal says
McKinney tree removal
www.quicktreeservice.com/connecticut/tree-trimming-and-tree-services-in-west-haven-ct/ says
http://www.quicktreeservice.com/connecticut/tree-trimming-and-tree-services-in-west-haven-ct/
tree cutting Roy UT says
tree cutting Roy UT
tree removal West New York NJ says
tree removal West New York NJ
La tablette arsenal vs ac milan live mise sur le marché au cours du deuxième trimestre. Les services de sécurité israéliens craignent des émeutes?dans maillot de foot vintage jours qui viennent? Il avait été arrêté le 18 février dans le cadre de lenquête sur des heurts qui sétaient produits près de la colonie de Kiryat Arba, qui fait arsenal barcelone 2010 office dexécutif par le biais du Conseil des ministres nommé par ses soins, Au lendemain des affirmations de La Repubblica effectif de la juventus un éventuel lobby gay au Vatican. puis premier secrétaire du tout-puissant Parti communiste de Cuba PCC en avril 2011! selon un sondage?réalisé par linstitut OpinionWay pour Metro et LCI! Il sera disponible mais je ne veux pas donner léquipe.
OaklEy EyEpatcH says
Of course high resolution film quality contains much memory, that why it gives you enhanced feature.
Hi there to all, the YouTube record that is posted at at this point has really pleasant quality along with pleasant audio quality
FakE OaklEy Flak JackEt says
For the reason that the YouTube movies are posted at this place same like I also embed YouTube video code at my own web site, as it is straightforward to take embedded code.
toms coupon code says
Your article crImmigration.com: Obama immigration plan is mixed bag write very well, thank you share!
i was basically browsing along with and also uncovered your web internet site. just wantd to point out great net site and this submit genuinely solved the dilemma.
Replica Oakley M Frame says
I all the time download a complete film in parts, that always existing at YouTube, because my network connection is awfully slow and YouTube fulfils my needs.
c字裤内衣秀 says
c字裤内衣秀
Remarkable YouTube video lessons posted at this site, I am going to subscribe for daily updates, for the reason that I don抰 desire to miss this series.
One more technique for advertising your web site is posting comments on different sites with your blog link.
Cheap Oakley Pit Boss says
Link exchange is nothing else except it is just placing the other person website link on your page at suitable place and other person will also do same in favor of you.
This piece of writing regarding how to embed a YouTube video code is genuinely helpful for fresh web users. Fastidious occupation, keep it up.
I’ve a group venture as nicely as Bing has 4 many entries for it, all of which have a tendency to be incorrect. How do I make the proper itemizing and eliminate other individuals? Google does not demonstrate wherever ideas on the very best way to try out this, that i can notify.
Leave a Reply to Cheap Oakley Pit Boss Cancel reply