> 1) ICE is abusing their power and illegally detaining and deporting people who shouldn't be deported
ICE has been going after low hanging fruit, ie arresting people when they go to their immigration court dates(aka following the rules).
> (1) can't they be taken to court?
Once arrested, ICE will ship people off to many states away(if you're european, imagine being arrested in the north of France and sent to a camp in southern Spain).
Once you are arrested by ICE, it's very difficult to be found. There is no arrest announcement or ability to call family. Basically you disappear into this system and if you have someone hire a lawyer, the lawyer essentially has to search for you in various prisons.
Sure they can be taken to court, but the arrestee wont see any restitution for the terrible conditions they were illegally forced into. If you do win in court( Kilmar Abrego), they'll send you somewhere even worse out of spite.
ICE has also made a hobby of repeatedly moving people around the country in order to separate them from lawyers who do find them, wasting taxpayer money on flights in the process.
> ICE has been going after low hanging fruit, ie arresting people when they go to their immigration court dates(aka following the rules).
As far as I understand (correct me if I am wrong), if you have no valid status in the US then going to court does not mean that you are following the rules, no? I mean, why would anyone with a valid status have to go to immigration court?
> > ICE has been going after low hanging fruit, ie arresting people when they go to their immigration court dates(aka following the rules).
>
> As far as I understand (correct me if I am wrong), if you have no valid status in the US then going to court does not mean that you are following the rules, no? I mean, why would anyone with a valid status have to go to immigration court?
One reason is legal check-ins, folks can be in the US on many different types of entry.
Some require regular check ins with ICE or an immigration judge to continue being here.
ICE told immigration judges to dismiss cases (based on a new memo being challenged) and enable immediate arrests. Additionally some folks who had continuing cases were getting arrested before the case concluded (e.g. asylum cases))
> ICE told immigration judges to dismiss cases (based on a new memo being challenged) and enable immediate arrests.
Note here, since some in this discussion seem to have a magical view of the neutrality and protective value of anything called a "court", that immigration courts are administrative courts within the executive branch, not actual independent courts.
> One reason is legal check-ins, folks can be in the US on many different types of entry.
What are legal check ins? Did you mean immigration court hearings?
Also, what kind of entry necessitates check in with ICE?
> Some require regular check ins with ICE or an immigration judge to continue being here.
As far as I know check-ins with ICE mean that the individual has a court order to be deported, but for various reasons is not deported yet. I am not sure about the check ins mandated by the immigration judge, so cannot comment on that, but I would like to learn more.
> ICE told immigration judges to dismiss cases (based on a new memo being challenged) and enable immediate arrests.
How does it work? Does ICE have the authority over immigration judge? Like, what is the chain of command here?
> Additionally some folks who had continuing cases were getting arrested before the case concluded (e.g. asylum cases))
I think it happens because they were not admitted via the port of entry but rather crossed the border without inspection. Waiting for the asylum hearing by itself doesn’t mean you have the right to be in the country.
> > One reason is legal check-ins, folks can be in the US on many different types of entry.
>
> What are legal check ins? Did you mean immigration court hearings?
>
>If you are released, you may have to go to regular check-in appointments as part of your immigration case. These are not the same as court appearances.
> Also, what kind of entry necessitates check in with ICE?
Asylum cases are one such type, there are more.
> > Some require regular check ins with ICE or an immigration judge to continue being here.
>
> As far as I know check-ins with ICE mean that the individual has a court order to be deported, but for various reasons is not deported yet.
Not necessarily.
> I am not sure about the check ins mandated by the immigration judge, so cannot comment on that, but I would like to learn more.
>
Google it.
> > ICE told immigration judges to dismiss cases (based on a new memo being challenged) and enable immediate arrests.
>
> How does it work? Does ICE have the authority over immigration judge? Like, what is the chain of command here?
Google the long series of events for the most up to date and accurate info.
> > Additionally some folks who had continuing cases were getting arrested before the case concluded (e.g. asylum cases))
>
> I think it happens because they were not admitted via the port of entry but rather crossed the border without inspection.
Based on what?
> Waiting for the asylum hearing by itself doesn’t mean you have the right to be in the country.
The folks already here have the right to due process.
ICE has been going after low hanging fruit, ie arresting people when they go to their immigration court dates(aka following the rules).
> (1) can't they be taken to court?
Once arrested, ICE will ship people off to many states away(if you're european, imagine being arrested in the north of France and sent to a camp in southern Spain).
Once you are arrested by ICE, it's very difficult to be found. There is no arrest announcement or ability to call family. Basically you disappear into this system and if you have someone hire a lawyer, the lawyer essentially has to search for you in various prisons.
Sure they can be taken to court, but the arrestee wont see any restitution for the terrible conditions they were illegally forced into. If you do win in court( Kilmar Abrego), they'll send you somewhere even worse out of spite.