DHS SSA No-Match Safe Harbor Rule
|
For
Immediate Release November 12, 2008
|
MEDIA
CONTACTS: Stanford Immigrants' Rights Clinic: Jayashri Srikantiah,
650-724-2442 National Immigration Law Center: Linton Joaquin,
213-674-2909 ACLU of Southern California: Gordon Smith,
213-977-5247 National Lawyers Guild-SF: Carlos Villarreal
415-377-6961 |
|
Immigrants'
Rights Organizations Sue Department of Homeland Security for Public
Accountability About Deportation Program that Sidesteps Legal Process for
Immigrants
SAN
FRANCISCO, Calif., November 12, 2008-Today a coalition of immigrants' rights
organizations asked a federal judge to compel the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) to disclose information about a program under which it removes
non-citizens from the U.S. without hearings before immigration judges. The
program, called "stipulated removal," has resulted in the removal of over 96,000
non-citizens since its inception.
The Stanford Immigrants' Rights
Clinic, together with the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the ACLU of
Southern California (ACLUSC) and the National Lawyers Guild of San Francisco
(NLGSF) filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California, under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to gain access to
agency records about stipulated removal from DHS and its sub-agencies, including
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The lawsuit also seeks access to
records from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and its Executive Office of
Immigration Review (EOIR).
Stipulated removal allows the Department of
Justice and Department of Homeland Security to remove a non-citizen, even one
with valid defenses against deportation, as long as the non-citizen signs an
order. DHS appears to target non-citizens in immigration detention for
stipulated removal, and does not allow the non-citizen to appear before a judge
prior to being deported. Advocates have expressed concerns that immigrants
signing these orders do not realize they are giving up their rights to challenge
their deportation.
In the lawsuit, NLGSF et al. v U.S. DHS, the
plaintiffs note that news reports, Congressional testimony, and agency press
releases reveal that the DHS and DOJ have broadly implemented stipulated removal
on a nationwide basis for at least 12 years. However, DHS and DOJ have failed
to produce records that reflect the full scope of stipulated removal's
implementation, and the select information DHS and DOJ have divulged to date
provide a "strong indication that other documents have been improperly
withheld."
"DHS is running a federal program that has resulted in the
deportation of almost 100,000 people without legal hearings, and yet the public
knows very little about the program," said Jayashri Srikantiah, director of the
Immigrants' Rights Clinic at Stanford Law School. "Stipulated removal raises
serious due process concerns because immigrant detainees may not know that they
are signing away their rights, and no judge ever speaks to the detainee to
ensure that they understand the process."
The lawsuit comes after two
FOIA requests in December 2005 and February 2008 yielded only minimal
information. According to data that was released under those FOIA requests by
the DOJ's Executive Office of Immigration Review, that office entered 96,241
stipulated removal orders between October 1999 and June 2008.
Karen
Tumlin, Staff Attorney at the National Immigration Law Center, observes: "DHS
has revealed close to nothing about a program that impacts thousands of
immigrants' due process rights. The stipulated removal program gives detained
immigrants an impossible choice: sign away your rights or stay in
detention."
"Immigrant detainees may be refugees or have U.S. citizen
family members," said Ahilan Arulanantham, an ACLU of Southern California staff
attorney. "The public should know whether DHS is pressuring these detainees to
give up their right to a hearing."
"Stipulated removal appears to target
the most vulnerable parts of the immigrant population," observed Carlos
Villarreal, Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild - San Francisco Bay
Area. "Immigrant detainees often lack the money to pay for lawyers and bond
money to get out of detention."
Jennifer Lee Koh, Cooley Godward Kronish
Fellow with Stanford Immigrants' Rights Clinic, said: "Before DHS further
expands its implementation of stipulated removal, the public should know whether
the program satisfies basic due process requirements. Immigrant detainees
should know exactly what they are giving up when they sign a stipulated order."
Students in the Stanford Immigrants' Rights Clinic participated in
drafting the FOIA requests and the complaint filed today.
For more
background about stipulated removal, see Backgrounder:
Stipulated Removal-- Federal authorities are deporting immigrants without
hearings, but the public knows very little about the program, attached to this release.
A copy
of the complaint filed today in federal district court will be available later
today at www.nilc.org.
|