Due Process and the Courts

The enforcement of immigration laws is a complex and hotly-debated topic. Learn more about the costs of immigration enforcement and the ways in which the U.S. can enforce our immigration laws humanely and in a manner that ensures due process.

Recent Features

  • FOIA

Investigating the Immigration Court System

We're demanding information to uncover the hiring process for Assistant Chief Immigration Judge and their influence over the immigration courts.

  • Blog

‘Your Client Is Going Bye-Bye.’ Investigation Details Immigration Judges’ Cruel Behavior in El Paso Court

The complaint outlines systemic due process concerns around unprofessional behavior by immigration judges and troubling court practices in El Paso.

Two Systems of Justice: How the Immigration System Falls Short of American Ideals of Justice

This special report lays out the the incongruency between America's criminal justice system and its immigration justice system, and provides recommendations for how these problems could be fixed.

READ MORE

All Due Process and the Courts Content

  • FOIA

Access to Counsel Before USCIS FOIA

The Council filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to compel the release of records relating to noncitizens’ access to counsel before United States Citizenship and...

  • FOIA

Access to Counsel Before ICE FOIA

The Council filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to compel the release of records relating to noncitizens’ access to counsel before Immigration and Customs Enforement...

  • FOIA

Video Hearings in Immigration Court FOIA

Beginning in the mid-1990s, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) began using video hearing equipment in immigration courts across the country. As a result, frequently a noncitizen facing removal is deprived of the opportunity to appear in person before an immigration judge. Video hearings are more common where a noncitizen is detained, though many non-detained individuals are subjected to video hearings as well. EOIR uses video hearings for both preliminary hearings (“master calendar hearings”) and merits hearings (“individual hearings”). In February 2012, the American Immigration Council submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to EOIR asking for records related to video teleconferencing (VTC). EOIR produced two sets of records.
  • Advocacy

Testimony submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee for May 18, 2011 hearing, “Improving Efficiency and Ensuring Justice in the Immigration Court System.”

Addressing access to counsel, effective assistance of counsel, protections for noncitizens lacking mental competency, the employment authorization employment clock, and the departure bar to motions to reopen.
  • Advocacy

Comments on the Immigration Adjudication Draft Report by the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) (submitted Feb. 13, 2012)

The Council commented on several issues addressed by the draft report, including video hearings (see page 4). ACUS’s draft report and the final recommendations, included that EOIR should consider more systemic assessments of the use of video hearings.
  • Advocacy

Letter to DOJ in response to request for comments regarding the Department’s review of its existing regulations (Mar. 31, 2011)

Regarding the departure bar to motions to reopen, ineffective assistance of counsel, fair removal procedures for noncitizens with mental disabilities, and asylum clock problems.
  • Advocacy

Comments on EOIR’s proposed rule on streamlining BIA cases (Aug. 18, 2008)

Addressing the BIA's affirmance without opinion process, three-member panel decisions, and precedent decisions, as well as exhaustion of administrative remedies and the scope of administrative review
  • Advocacy

Letter by the Council and AILA urging USCIS to address reports of widespread and recurrent restrictions on access to counsel. (Mar. 24, 2011)

In this March 24, 2011 letter, the Council and AILA urged USCIS to address reports of widespread and recurrent restrictions on access to counsel. These restrictions, documented in a nation-wide survey (http://www.aila.org/infonet/final-results-attorney-representation-before-dhs) of immigration attorneys, included limitations on attorneys’ ability to communicate with their clients, restrictions on attorney seating during USCIS interviews, and limitations on attorneys’ ability to submit documents to the interviewing officer.
  • Advocacy

Providing a Safety Valve: The Need for Greater Discretion in Immigration Decision Making (Jun. 6, 2013)

Discussing efforts in S. 744, “The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act,” to restore a measure of discretion and flexibility to the immigration system.
  • Advocacy

Letter to EOIR recommending possible steps to take to protect the right to effective assistance of counsel (Nov. 12, 2009)

In November 2009, the American Immigration Council sent a letter to the Executive Office for Immigration Review recommending steps the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals can take to protect the right to effective assistance of counsel and help ensure that noncitizens in removal proceedings are afforded a fair hearing.

Most Read

  • Publications
  • Blog Posts
  • Past:
  • Trending