The Horseback Shock

 

US Policy Toward Haitian Immigrants Is Part of a Long, Troubled History

Shocking images have emerged of Border Patrol officers on horseback charging toward Haitian immigrants in and around the border town of Del Rio, Texas. Thousands of Haitians have come to our southern border as conditions in their home country continue to deteriorate following a devastating earthquake in August and the assassination of President Jovenel Moise in July. Though the Biden administration acknowledged the horrific conditions in Haiti as it extended Temporary Protected Status to Haitians in May 2021, it has decided to remove thousands of Haitians from our southern border.

The administration’s treatment of Haitian migrants has received extensive criticism. Yet its actions are a continuation of a long history of mistreating Haitian migrants.

The largest mass refugee crisis from Haiti in modern history arose in 1991. A military coup usurped the democratically-elected president of Haiti, Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Following the coup, tens of thousands of Haitians fled the country, often on boats headed for the United States.

Initially, the U.S. Coast Guard turned thousands back to Haiti, often to imprisonment or death. A judge in Florida later ruled they could not be turned back without the opportunity to seek asylum. Thousands of Haitian refugees were then diverted to a now-infamous naval base to be held and processed—Guantanamo Bay.

Thousands of Haitians were held at Guantanamo Bay throughout the early 1990s. In 2002, the U.S. government issued an executive order creating what became the Migrant Operations Center for detaining people who were interdicted at sea—largely Haitian and Cuban nationals. The Biden administration issued a new request for contract services to operate this detention center. While the government has clarified that this detention center is only used (per the executive order) for people detained while at sea, it is indicative of the disparate treatment that disproportionately affects Haitian migrants.

9/11

 

Fear of Another 9/11 Continues to Drive US Immigration Policy 20 Years Later

The September 11th terrorist attacks not only led to the tragic deaths of 2,977 people, they fundamentally changed the nature of immigration law and policy in the United States.

Since 9/11, the U.S. government has viewed every non-U.S. citizen seeking to enter the country as a potential threat. Foreign tourists and students, temporary workers, permanent immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented immigrants are all now evaluated first and foremost through the lens of national security.

The goal of preventing foreign terrorists from ever again mounting an attack within the United States is certainly understandable. But politicians have used the fear of another terrorist attack to justify harsh immigration policies that stereotype and dehumanize any non-citizen who wants to visit, work, or live in the United States. This often comes at great cost to civil liberties and with little value to counterintelligence. And while the anti-immigrant policies of the Trump administration were particularly egregious in this regard, no presidential administration of the past 20 years has managed to move beyond the fear-driven policies of the post-9/11 era.

The single-minded focus on security after 9/11 was exemplified best by the decision in 2002 to dissolve the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and assign its functions to the newly created Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The primary mission of DHS was to prevent another terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

Immigration Prevention

 California Law Would Prevent Transfers From Local Law Enforcement to ICE Custody

Proposed legislation in California that would further limit the state’s involvement in immigration detention has made progress toward becoming law. The VISION Act would prevent transfers to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody of people who are released from state or local custody. The bill passed the state assembly in June and is now expected to pass the state Senate in the coming days.

If passed, the law would ensure that people granted release from criminal custody are free to return to their community. Each year, 1,500 immigrants who earn their release from California prisons are transferred to ICE custody. The law would apply to any release, regardless of whether it is due to a completed sentence, a parole grant, dropped charges, or a judge’s order.

80% of California voters supports ending these transfers, which until now have not been covered by the state’s “sanctuary policy.” In 2017, California passed the California Values Act, which limited law enforcement cooperation with ICE. However, amendments added to the bill made exceptions for people who had one of 800 specific convictions and for people in the state prison system.

ICE frequently issues requests—called detainers—to law enforcement, asking them to hold individuals that ICE believes to be deportable until the agency can take custody of them. A person could be deportable because they are undocumented or because they have committed a crime that violates the requirements of their immigration status, such as a green card. If law enforcement cooperates with a detainer, they hold the person up to 48 hours past the time when they would have otherwise released them.

Public Defenders

 New Illinois Law Allows Public Defenders to Represent Immigrants Facing Deportation

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker signed a law in August that would allow the Cook County Public Defender to represent immigrants in the Chicago immigration court. The law is part of a movement to expand access to legal representation for people facing deportation. It comes on the heels of another pro-immigrant Illinois law that disallows immigration detention in the state.

A person charged with a jailable crime has the right to a free attorney if they cannot afford one. Often that free lawyer is a public defender paid for by the state. But a person facing deportation does not have a right to a free lawyer in most cases. If an immigrant cannot afford a lawyer and cannot find a legal services provider who is able to take his case, he will have to fight against deportation alone. This involves navigating laws that are often described as “byzantine” and as complex as the U.S. tax code.  

Having a lawyer can mean the difference between getting legal status in the United States and being forced to leave. A 2015 study showed that for nondetained immigrants, people with lawyers were nearly five times more likely to obtain immigration relief than those without (63% of those with representation obtain relief versus 13% of those without representation obtain relief). Among detained immigrants, people with lawyers were twice as likely to obtain relief than without lawyers (49% of those with representation are able to obtain relief whereas only 23% of those without representation are able to obtain relief).