Washington Post
(The Fix):
By Janell Ross
July 8, 2015
Illegal
immigration is one of those topics on which almost everyone has an
opinion -- maybe several opinions. But when it comes to the facts, the
number of people with
a grasp on them is a lot smaller.
Donald
Trump, a contender for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, said last
month that illegal immigrants coming across the U.S.-Mexico border are
in large part "rapists"
and "murderers." And in San Francisco, the shooting death of Kathryn
Steinle, 31, allegedly caused by man who has been deported multiple
times and convicted of a series of very serious crimes, has set off a
new wave of concern about immigration and so-called
"sanctuary cities" like San Francisco.
It's
a lot. That's why there is a Part I and a Part II to this post. But
we've tried to boil it down to the essentials for your next
immigration-related debate.
If
a person is in the United States illegally, why isn't he or she
arrested and shipped back to his or her home country immediately?
This is one of those places where the country's commitment to freedom and liberty get a real road test.
As
mentioned above, immigration is often complicated. At least some
portion of the people who do enter the country illegally or overstay the
terms of their visitor or
student visas also have legitimate asylum claims. Asylum is limited to
individuals who can provide evidence that they have faced persecution or
might be killed if they return to their home country. And U.S. law says
that most people caught inside the United
States should be given a chance to make those claims in an immigration
court. (For more information on asylum seekers, see Tables 16 and 17
here).
Now,
layer on top of that more than 445,000 people awaiting immigration
hearings. Most of these people cannot make a successful asylum claim but
might have some other
legal defense such as proof of a U.S. citizen parent or grandparent.
Unauthorized
immigrants caught inside the United States -- or in some cases at the
border -- generally get a hearing in one of the nation's deeply
backlogged immigration
courts. Wait times now stretch into 2019.
That
means that federal immigration authorities also have to make decisions
about whom to hold during that wait and whom to release and trust to
show up again.
How many people does the United States deport each year?
The
data reporting here lags a bit behind and, of course, varies from year
to year. But on average, between 2011 and 2013, immigration courts
ordered about 414,650 people
out in one way or another. Here's the picture painted in the Department
of Homeland Security's most recent annual immigration data report, for
2013.
Enforcement Statistics
What is a "sanctuary city," anyway?
The
policies and practices differ in the estimated 60 sanctuary cities
around the country. That list includes major cities such as New York,
Los Angeles, San Francisco
and Houston. But generally, when someone has been, for instance,
arrested for driving without a license and then identified as an illegal
immigrant at a jail in a sanctuary city, they must serve jail time for
state charges or pay related fines. Then, they
are let go.
Most
of these cities have identified some set of guidelines or conditions
under which federal immigration officials must be alerted before the
person's release. Usually
they are connected to what's on the person's rap sheet.
But
some either don't have them or don't follow them. For a deeper look at
the role that San Francisco's sanctuary-city status has played in the
immigration debate since
the Steinle shooting, see this.
Once
an undocumented immigrant has been arrested for committing a crime
inside the United States, why do sanctuary cities let them go?
During
the apex of the country's illegal immigration challenges, before the
recession, law enforcement officials in some communities expressed
concern about the practice
of releasing these inmates after they had served time for state
offenses. Some of those communities entered agreements to help federal
authorities with immigration enforcement. This went on between 2004 and
2012.
These
agreements allowed local jails to house undocumented immigrants after
they had served time on state charges and bill the federal government
for this service. Sometimes
inmates were passed along to jails in other places without any formal
notice to family members, then into the immigration court system for an
expedited removal hearing. In many cases, people were returned to their
home countries in weeks.
That
program was widely criticized as a possible revenue stream for some
local jails and a potential violation of international human rights
accords. Some people were
unable to communicate with embassy officials from their countries of
origin or notify family members of their arrests, basically disappearing
without explanation. Civil liberties groups called it a vehicle for
racial and ethnic profiling. One Kentucky sheriff
described it as part of his toolkit to "stack these violators like
cordwood." In addition, more than one analysis of who was deported and
what happened during that process showed that most were people initially
arrested for minor traffic violations and who
had no criminal record.
President
Obama touted the fact that his administration had deported the largest
number of people in U.S. history. (Read the more complicated truth
here.) Meanwhile, immigrant
advocates said all of this deeply damaged already-limited police trust
in immigrant communities, making people afraid to call police or provide
information. That, these advocates argued, was the real threat to
public safety.
This is where sanctuary cities come in.
What happens in other cities?
After
a series of changes, new programs and memos from the top that were
supposed to assure that more of the nation's deportation apparatus got
aimed at serious and violent
criminals, the Department of Homeland Security is now asking
communities to participate in a different program, this time called
Priority Enforcement.
Priority
Enforcement won't formally begin until later this summer, The
Washington Post reported Tuesday. When it does, it will ask local law
enforcement agencies to notify
federal immigration authorities before the scheduled release of an
immigrant targeted for deportation. Those targeted for deportation
include people with violent and serious crime convictions. And federal
officials told The Post that they did make just such
a request to the folks in San Francisco.
Finally, is there any evidence that those who enter the country illegally commit more crime than others?
The Fix looked at this issue this week and found an answer that shouldn't really be surprising.
Like
every population, there are some people who have immigrated to the
United States illegally who go on to commit serious and misdemeanor
crimes in this country. But
immigrants of all kinds are actually less likely to commit crimes than
those born inside the United States. (For more detail check out this
post immediately.) Here's the big take away in one chart.
Crime and Immigrants
This
chart highlights all immigrants, but it's important to note that more
than one-quarter of all immigrants currently in the United States are
undocumented. So a spike
in their crime rate would likely mean the "first generation" line
wouldn't be so low.
OK. We hope that helps.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment