[ad_1]
But Trump's fixation on the courts and the judges who employ them goes against what his Attorney General is trying to do to reform the courts in order to align them with the President's vision, including hiring of immigration judges and the restriction of asylum laws.
The President tweeted that those arrested at the border should simply be told that they can not enter, rather than go through the system.
"When someone enters, we must immediately, without judges or trials, bring them back to where they come from," Trump said Saturday.
Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters Monday that "virtually all Americans" agree that the lengthy court proceedings make no sense for migrants who enter the country illegally. Trump, she said, "would definitely like to see a faster eviction."
"Just because you do not see a judge does not mean you do not get due process," she said.
Immigration courts decide whether immigrants are legally entitled to stay in the United States or should be deported – and these cases include people arriving at the border as well as people from within the United States. United, who may or may not have legal status. some point.
But Trump's suggestion has several problems, including the fact that there are fewer than 350 immigration judges nationwide and the Justice Department has budgeted for just 100 more .
Moreover, the idea that immigration courts could be completely abolished would likely defeat the Constitution and a host of national and international laws that confer rights to any the world in the United States and who cross the border, whether they are citizens or not.
And at least some of the immigrants at the border have, in fact, the right under US and international law to be allowed to enter the United States even if they enter illegally.
The Trump administration has been fixed on immigration courts, which are suffering from a considerable backlog that slows down business, but not in the manner suggested by the president.
Unlike other federal courts, immigration courts are entirely the responsibility of the Department of Justice and Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Among the measures that Sessions has taken, it has been to set performance quotas for judges, encouraging them to speed up the processing of cases.
"To end anarchy and move to the virtuous cycle, we must be very productive because the volume is critical," said Sessions at an annual training meeting for the purpose immigration judges of the country. "Let's be clear: we have a purpose and purpose – and this goal is to end the anarchy that now exists in our immigration system.
L & # 39; backlog
One of the reasons there is a bipartisan agreement that the system needs more immigration judges is the backlog of more and more important records, which was nearly 700 000 as of March 31, according to the Department of Justice.
Due to the growing number of cases being litigated, the time that immigrants wait to hear their case increases – and it can go on for years before the case is settled.
It has become a problem because it allows immigrants to live and work in the United States in many cases while they wait. The Trump administration argues that the backlog is due to fraudulent claims erasing the system – although it has presented no evidence that fraudulent cases are more than a tiny fraction of the total.
According to justice statistics, about 22% of asylum cases, for example, were granted this year in mid-April. But not everything else was refusal – about 42% were refused in the same amount of time.
Judge of hiring, efficiency
But concerns have been raised about the way Sessions hires judges and the measures it has put in place to try to speed them up.
Since Immigration Judges work technically for Sessions and the Department of Justice as non-political federal employees, he ultimately appoints them to their position. A handful of Democrats in the House accused him of illegally filtering candidates for perceived political ideology. A candidate on the Immigration Appeals Board who had her job offer canceled made her case public to CNN, rejecting the explanation given by the department to overturn an offer that had been made to her. been made while waiting for a background check.
In addition, Sessions has implemented performance measures for judges who require them to complete 700 files annually – which the union believes is not realistic and could jeopardize the impartial judicial process or give the judge the chance to do so. impression of bias, which would only slow down by generating many calls.
"We must show to non-citizens who may or may not remain what a fair and impartial American justice system will provide," said Judge Dana Leigh Marks, President Emeritus of the National Association of Judges of Justice. l & # 39; immigration. "It means their day before a court, before an independent and neutral decision-maker."
Other movements of the sessions
Sessions also tested the limits of its powers on immigration courts by other means.
As Attorney General, he has sole authority to serve as the supreme court for immigration courts, which means he can choose to overturn the decisions of the appeal courts. and to establish interpretations of the law that all judges must follow.
He has already used this authority to reverse the protection of asylum for victims of domestic violence and other victims of crime, a political decision that will largely affect Central American migrants.
He has also taken other measures with this authority, including allowing judges to dismiss asylum applications without a hearing, by shifting the burden of proof to the migrant – who is not represented legally by the government – and making it more difficult to close the judges. case at their discretion.
The proceedings of the sessions will likely have an impact beyond the courts and could be implemented immediately at the border by those who decide which asylum applications are sufficiently credible to go forward.
Source link
