Lawsuit Seeks to Overturn New Fast-Track Deportation Rule
Andrea Sears, Public News Service – CT
HARTFORD, Conn. – Immigrants’ rights advocates say a new rule
expanding fast-track deportations is unconstitutional, and they’ve filed
suit in a federal court to try to stop it.
The new rule went into effect July 23. Before then, undocumented
immigrants apprehended within 100 miles of the border who could not
prove they had lived in this country for more than two weeks could be
deported in a matter of days.
The new rule, enacted without public comment, expands the residence
requirement to two years and can be applied to immigrants anywhere in
the United States without a hearing before an immigration judge.
According to Celso Perez, a staff attorney at the ACLU’s Immigrant’s Rights Project,
that violates the Administrative Procedure Act, the Immigration and
Nationality Act and the Fifth Amendment’s due-process clause.
“You can literally be deporting citizens, lawful permanent residents,
and you can be deporting individuals who may be undocumented but may
also have legitimate grounds for staying in the country,” he states.
Administration officials say the new rule will free up beds in immigrant
detention facilities and reduce the backlog of cases in immigration
court.
But Perez says the rule puts anyone who doesn’t have proof of how long
he or she has been in the country at risk of detention and could lead to
massive sweeps in communities anywhere in the country.
“It’s an extremely problematic carte blanche to officers in the sense
that there is no real check on someone being picked up and detained by
immigration,” Perez stresses.
Before the rule change, immigrants had a chance to challenge the basis
and means of their detention or argue that they had grounds for being
allowed to remain in the country.
Perez says the law requires a public comment period on a rule change
such as this unless the administration can claim that exigent
circumstances require it to be enacted immediately.
“The administration has been considering this for a period of years,” he
states. “So, it’s unclear why now, all of a sudden, the rule is enacted
the same day it’s issued without a notice and comment period.”
The lawsuit was been filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.





