Powered By Blogger

Friday, October 21, 2011

New Tools from @TRACReports For Tracking ICE Prosecutorial Discretion « Detention Watch Network: Monitoring & Challenging Immigration Detention, Immigration Enforcement & Deportation

New Tools from @TRACReports For Tracking ICE Prosecutorial Discretion « Detention Watch Network: Monitoring & Challenging Immigration Detention, Immigration Enforcement & Deportation

New Tools from @TRACReports For Tracking ICE Prosecutorial Discretion

OCTOBER 21, 2011

via Jeff Lamicela, Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse:
TRAC has launched a bundle of new report series, with accompanying data tools and regular updates, which allow the public to monitor ICE’s exercise of prosecutorial discretion in the Immigration Courts, as spelled out in Director John Morton’s June 17, 2011 memorandum. TRAC’s new tools allow tracking by charge, nationality, and location (state, court or specific hearing location).

The most recent data, current through July 2011, show that there has not as yet been any meaningful upturn in cases where the person charged has been allowed to remain in this country. Indeed, during the three most recent quarters, the proportion of individuals allowed to remain in the country is now below 30 per cent, down from levels in 2010.

However, Immigration Courts varied widely in the proportion of cases in which deportation orders were granted — from a low of 28.8 percent in the New York City Immigration Court, up to 98.8 percent in the Lumpkin, Georgia Immigration Court. Among nationalities, cases resulting in deportation orders ranged from highs of 86.8 percent for individuals from Mexico and 84.4 percent for those from Honduras, down to 13.1 for individuals from Eritrea and 20.7 percent for those from Ethiopia.

TRAC’s latest report can be viewed here.

For the accompanying data tools which allow tracking by charge, nationality, and specific location, go to:

TRAC is also releasing today an updated report on Immigration Court processing times which continue to increase, and are now 30 percent longer than average dispositions times during FY 2009.

Accompanying data apps have been expanded to allow tracking disposition times both by type of outcome, and by original charge:

To keep up with TRAC, follow us on Twitter @tracreports or like us on Facebook.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Enough Is Enough » Enough is Enough Rally

Enough Is Enough » Enough is Enough Rally

WHEN: October 29, 2011 • 12 noon
WHERE: U.S. Capitol West Front Lawn
WHY: Democracy will not die on our watch

"Sometimes an institution becomes too sick to fix itself…Sometimes an institution, like an individual, needs an intervention, from people, from friends, from outside."
Lawrence Lessig, Republic, Lost

America is at a crossroads. Our political system itself allows powerful special interests and party ideologues to have more influence with our elected Representatives than average people. Washington has ground to a halt amidst cynical electioneering while tens of millions continue to suffer in this struggling economy. It is clear that Congress has become “too sick to fix itself.”

These are reasons to be discouraged. However, we love our country and we must summon our dignity, strength and the spirit of unity. We must resolve to restore a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Giving up is not an option.

Hundreds of people from all over the U.S. are signing up to speak out at the US Capitol on October 29 about how Washington's dysfunction and corruption have impacted their lives. Our personal stories, one after another after another, will announce our determination to rescue Congress from the corrupting influence of money.

On Monday after the rally, we will go to Congress together and talk to our representatives. We will persist with the intervention every week until we are heard. We ask you to go to the district offices of your representatives to continue the intervention.

CLICK HERE TO RSVP on Facebook
and invite your friends

SIGN UP TO SPEAK on Oct 29
SIGN UP TO ORGANIZE locally & online

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Santa Clara County Ends Collaboration with ICE, Creates Local Protections Against Controversial "Secure Communities" Program | Silicon Valley De-Bug

Santa Clara County Ends Collaboration with ICE, Creates Local Protections Against Controversial "Secure Communities" Program | Silicon Valley De-Bug

Santa Clara County Ends Collaboration with ICE, Creates Local Protections Against Controversial "Secure Communities" Program

In what has been heralded the most progressive policy in the nation, Santa Clara County today voted in a new set of guidelines for civil immigration detainers, which in effect ends the county’s collaboration with Immigration and Custom Enforcement.

Santa Clara County Votes to End Collaboration with Immigration and Customs Enforcement Oct. 18, 2011 from DE BUG on Vimeo.

In what has been heralded as the most progressive policy in the nation, Santa Clara County today voted in a new set of guidelines for civil immigration detainers, which in effect ends the county’s collaboration with Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE). Supervisor George Shirakawa, who championed the policy, told an audience of supporters after the County Board of Supervisors' vote, “Today is historic. We now have the most progressive policy in this field, and the whole nation will be looking at us as Santa Clara County makes it official: we don’t do ICE’s job.” Civil immigration detainers are requests from ICE to the county to detain jailed individuals after the completion of their sentence from a criminal charge in order for them to get picked up for immigration detention and deportation proceedings.

For immigrant advocates and county officials, the new policy -- which will only honor detainer request if, “there is a written agreement with the federal government by which all costs incurred by the County in complying with the ICE detainer will be reimbursed” -- is a way to exert local control in the face of a controversial federal ICE program called Secure Communities. Having been rolled out in 2008, Secure Communities uses fingerprints gathered at jails to notify ICE agents of immigration status of individuals to then initiate detainer requests. Since the inception of the program, the federal government has not reimbursed any county which has honored detainer requests issued through Secured Communities. The program has also received pushback from counties and states who say Secure Communities violates targeted individuals' constitutional protections, places financial hardships on cash-strapped counties, and jeopardizes public safety by making immigrant communities fearful of law enforcement. In describing the often contentious relationship with ICE regarding Secure Communities, Supervisor Dave Cortese said, “Frankly, there has been a lack of integrity from ICE on these issues. Today, we are sending a message, one county at a time, you need to fix what’s broken before you ask us to enforce bad laws.”

Cortese’s frustration comes from a history of written commitments he says “were reneged upon” by ICE. The agency initially told counties that they had the option to opt out of Secure Communities only to rescind that offer after counties attempted to do so in 2010. Santa Clara County was one of the first in the country to attempt the opt-out. In the wake of ICE’s re-positioning around the opt-out, counties critical of Secure Communities were at a crossroads as to how to limit the fallout of the program.

Santa Clara County formed a taskforce of law enforcement agencies, informed by County Counsel, to craft a policy around the principle operating mechanism of Secured Communities – the detainer request -- given ICE’s shifting information regarding the program. On October 5, 2011, the taskforce came up with a policy that would limit the county to only honor detainers after conviction (through Secure Communities, even those who had not been found guilty of the crime that placed them in jail were still vulnerable to a detainer hold), would not honor detainer requests for juveniles, and would only honor requests for a specific list of “serious” and "violent" felonies. Given that individuals convicted of this subset of criminal charges would go to the state prison system, rather than stay in the county jail once convicted, the policy in practice would mean only a narrow few would be subject to county detainer holds. Yet, as the taskforce recommendation moved along to the full County Board of Supervisors for a final vote, Supervisor Shirakawa, the head of the Public Safety and Justice Committee, added an amendment which further limits the scope of when the county would honor detainer requests. His amendment added language around only considering detainer requests when given a written agreement for reimbursement by the federal government, and stating that except for particular circumstances, “ICE agents shall not be given access to individuals or be allowed to use County facilities for investigative interviews or other purposes, and County personnel shall not expend County time or resources responding to ICE inquiries or communicating with ICE regarding individuals’ incarceration or release date.” In explaining the amendment to the rest of the Board, he said, “ICE has lied to us in the past with Secure Communities. We need to say enough is enough.”

Jazmin Segura, a policy analyst for Services, Immigrants Rights and Education, is part of a cross-ethnic county-wide coalition of civil rights organizations who has been pushing for the policy since Secure Communities was first introduced. She says, “We congratulate the County Board of Supervisors for taking this historic step in sending a clear message to immigrant communities that local law enforcement is not ICE,” Segura says since Secure Communities was introduced, her office has received an uptick of calls from immigrant residents who were victims of crime, yet fearful to contact law enforcement.

While Segura says the policy change will greatly impact immigrant communities in Santa Clara County, some advocates see the policy as a signal that the tide is shifting as local communities develop similar strategies to respond to an increase in ICE enforcement. Angela Junk, a staff attorney with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, works with similar coalitions as the Santa Clara group in regions across the country. She says, “This policy sends the message that local participation in the enforcement of immigration laws is not mandatory and that due process and equal treatment under the law applies to all persons in the U.S.”

To read the full documents from the board, scroll through the pdf attachments on the following October 18, 2011 Santa Clara County Board meeting.

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

via @ChangeImmigrant: Essex County, NJ Marches Against For-Profit Immigrant Detention « Detention Watch Network: Monitoring & Challenging Immigration Detention, Immigration Enforcement & Deportation

via @ChangeImmigrant: Essex County, NJ Marches Against For-Profit Immigrant Detention « Detention Watch Network: Monitoring & Challenging Immigration Detention, Immigration Enforcement & Deportation

via @ChangeImmigrant: Essex County, NJ Marches Against For-Profit Immigrant Detention

OCTOBER 11, 2011

Text written by Rachel LaBruyere and reposted from Change.org. Video via Casa Esperanza’s Youtube Channel.


On Sunday over 125 faith leaders, children, families and concerned community members marched through Newark, New Jersey to oppose the expansion of a controversial immigrant detention center.
Holding signs that read “Immigrants are not commodities” and “Do not jail our neighbor”, the crowd marched down Doremus Avenue and through what locals have dubbed “chemical corridor”, where the current detention center is located and the proposed expansion would be built within a dangerous distance of several known superfund sites.
Essex County freeholders maintain that the expansion, while “unpleasant”, is a way to bring money into the county’s struggling economy. On Sunday, the marchers made it clear that the indefinite detention of immigrants for profit (especially in an area known for environmental health risks) isn’t merely “unpleasant”, it is unjust. ”This experiment of Essex County simply for profit is an immoral move. The county is profiting on splitting up families and the indignity of detention,” said Frank Costanza, a member of IRATE and First Friends. (via NY Daily News)

Kathy O’Leary, who started a Change.org petitionto oppose the expansion and demand better conditions, said she was happy with the size of the crowd at Sunday’s march. The size and enthusiasm of the crowd was proof that the proposed expansion has sparked the community to action. After listening to a set from the Catholic Worker Band the crowd marched to Delaney House, the current detention center that houses 800 immigrant detainees. Along the way they saw signs that have earned “chemical corridor” its nickname: a stream overflowing with trash, the smell of raw sewage and chemicals growing stronger and abandoned factories littering the area, which was a center of industry for decades before falling into decline.

Ralph Caputo, vice president of the freeholder board went on the record saying “this is a very unpleasant way to get revenue, but it’s going to be helpful”, causing concerned community members to question who would benefit from the deal. A handful of marchers held signs on Sunday read “Ralph Caputo: Detention is not ‘helpful’ for immigrants.” This point was driven home as community members stood up to testify to their own time spent in Essex County detention. Many of the immigrants detained (sometimes for years) in these facilities have no criminal charges, rather they have lapsed visas or other civil violations.

Perhaps most damning is that the contractor originally awarded the bid on the expansion of the facility, CEC (Community Education Centers), has donated tens of thousands of dollars to Essex County Freeholders’ campaigns, including the County Executive. Among those who have benefitted from said donations is Mr. Caputo.

Sunday’s march brought even more attention to the fight the local community is waging against using immigrants for profit and county freeholders are facing ever stronger opposition. Sign Kathy’s petition and join the the fight.

Further coverage of the march:

More videos from Casa Esperanza:

CCA-Run Prison Remains Idaho’s Most Violent Lockup | Cuéntame | Latino News. Video. Music. Impact

CCA-Run Prison Remains Idaho’s Most Violent Lockup | Cuéntame | Latino News. Video. Music. Impact

CCA run prison in Idaho remains a very violent lockup. Surprising? You be the judge.

Via NPR

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — In the last four years, Idaho’s largest privately run prison has faced federal lawsuits, widespread public scrutiny, increased state oversight, changes in upper management and even an ongoing FBI investigation.

Yet the Corrections Corp. of America-run Idaho Correctional Center remains the most violent lockup in Idaho.

Records obtained by The Associated Press show that while the assault rate improved somewhat in the four-year period examined, ICC inmates are still more than twice as likely to be assaulted as those at other Idaho prisons.

Between September 2007 and September 2008, both ICC and the state-run Idaho State Correctional Institution were medium-security prisons with roughly 1,500 inmates each. But during that 12-month span, ICC had 132 inmate-on-inmate assaults, compared to just 42 at ISCI. In 2008, ICC had more assaults than all other Idaho prisons combined.

By 2010, both prisons had grown with 2,080 inmates at ICC and 1,688 inmates at ISCI. Records collected by the AP showed that there were 118 inmate-on-inmate assaults at ICC compared to 38 at ISCI. And again last year, ICC had more assaults than all the other prisons combined.

Shannon Cluney, who was the head of the Idaho Department of Correction’s virtual prison program until he was recently promoted to be the warden of the South Boise Women’s Correctional Center, said the AP’s numbers for assaults at the private prison were actually low: The Virtual Prisons Program investigated 141 inmate-on-inmate assaults at ICC during 2010. The discrepancy, Cluney said, could be because the AP examined specific records that are supposed to be generated with each assault, while his department also investigated assaults that were reported late and didn’t have the record.

Still, Cluney said he’s seen marked improvement at ICC.

“I think — when I look at the fact that more incidences are reported anonymously, and I look at the increase in the offender population, and I look at the types or severity of the incidences — that there has been an improvement,” Cluney said. “Is there room for more? Absolutely.”

All calls to ICC officials were referred to CCA spokesman Steve Owen, who emailed a statement saying CCA officials were proud of their work at the Idaho Correctional Center, and that CCA employees are committed to enhancing safety. He said ICC’s new warden, Timothy Wengler, has increased efforts to prevent assaults at the lockup.

“Safety and security for the public, our employees, and the inmates entrusted to our care is our top priority,” Owen said.

Cluney said the fact that inmates at the private prison are more likely to report assaults now shows they feel safer and are less afraid of reprisals. The severity of the assaults at the prison has also dropped, he said, with fewer attacks involving weapons, serious injuries or groups of offenders.

In 2008, state officials said, ICC had a violence rate three times higher than other prisons because of gangs, and they said action was taken to identify and separate gang members from their enemies. The following year, the rate of inmate-on-inmate assaults at ICC remained largely unchanged, despite months of concern from lawmakers and state correction officials.

Since then, in 2009 and 2010, several ICC inmates sued in federal court, with so many of the lawsuits making similar allegations about rampant violence that a judge decided to combine them all into one potential class-action case.

That case was eventually split into two: One lawsuit from inmate Marlin Riggs, who was asking for $55 million in damages after he was severely beaten in what he said was a preventable attack, and the other from inmates who were asking only for changes in the way the prison is run. CCA settled both lawsuits last month, agreeing to increase staffing and make other changes at ICC and reaching a sealed agreement with Riggs.

Also, the Idaho Department of Correction stopped housing inmates in out-of-state prisons, allowing three state contract monitors to focus full-time on whether CCA is running the prison in accordance with its Idaho contract. The monitors spend about 75 percent of their time at the prison.

And in another development, CCA transferred former warden Phillip Valdez and former deputy warden Dan Prado to other private prisons, and appointed warden Timothy Wengler to run ICC in 2010.

An investigation was launched by the Justice Department and the FBI into several inmate-on-inmate attacks at the prison, including one on Hanni Elabed, who was beaten unconscious and stomped by an attacker for several minutes while guards watched, according to records. Elabed was left with permanent brain damage from the attack. The investigation is ongoing.

During this period, Idaho renewed CCA’s contract to run the prison, approving 628 more beds and substantially boosting the number of inmates kept there.

Cluney said the state’s new contract with CCA, which went into effect in 2009, really helped the Idaho Department of Correction by requiring that CCA follow more IDOC policies. That gave IDOC authority to more closely monitor events at the lockup.

“We are looking at every single incident in the last year and a half,” Cluney said. The department is looking to see “whether the response to the each incident was appropriate, whether the medical follow-up to the incident was appropriate and complete, and if any corrective action was needed, that CCA workers identify and take the appropriate action.”

But IDOC officials say ultimately, there’s only so much the department can do. That’s where the new settlement between CCA and the inmates will help, said IDOC Director Brent Reinke.

“We need to see what’s happening behind the fence when we’re there and when we’re not there,” Reinke said. “We have three monitors now. We could have six there and not see everything.”

Because of the settlement, “I think we should see the level of violence plateau and even reduce a little bit” in the coming year, Reinke said.

iliana
View all posts by iliana
Ilianas website