The United States is implementing a new deportation plan that has sparked widespread concern among immigration advocates and legal experts. Under this plan, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can deport migrants to third countries with as little as six hours’ notice and without guarantees of safety in the receiving nation. This policy shift raises serious questions about human rights and the potential dangers faced by those being deported.
This article delves into the details of this controversial plan, examining the implications of the Supreme Court ruling that paved the way for its implementation. We will explore the concerns raised by immigration lawyers, the potential impact on thousands of immigrants, and the specific guidelines outlined in the ICE memo detailing the new procedures. Understanding this policy is crucial for anyone concerned about immigration law and human rights.
ICE’s New Deportation Plan: Six-Hour Notice and No Safety Assurance
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is reportedly planning to deport migrants with as little as six hours of advance notice to countries that are not their own– even without any guarantees of safety from the receiving nations. ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons told the ICE workforce in a recent memo that the Supreme Court’s last month ruling has cleared the way for “immediately” deporting immigrants to “alternative” countries, without “diplomatic assurances” of protection against torture or persecution, according to a report by The Washington Post.
In cases of deportation to countries with no “diplomatic assurance,” deportees will ideally receive a notice 24 hours in advance. However, in “exigent circumstances,” removal can be carried out within only six hours, the report said. Those being flown to places offering those assurances, deportation can be carried out with no advance notice.
A Significant Departure from Previous Practice
The new US policy marks a significant departure from previous deportation practice, when migrants were rarely sent to third countries. Among those affected would be thousands of immigrants who might face danger in their own countries, or people from nations like China or Cuba that do not always cooperate with deportations due to frosty relationships with the US.
Immigration Lawyers’ Warning About Deportation Plans
Immigration lawyers have warned that the new policy could endanger thousands of longtime immigrants with work permits and families in the US. These people can be uprooted and sent to places where they lack family ties or even a common language.
“It puts thousands of lives at risk of persecution and torture,” said Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, which is challenging the ruling in court.
Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, lead counsel in another immigration case, said the move is “definitely” going to affect “thousands upon thousands of people”. “This is a category of people who understood themselves to be out of the woods,” he said.
Legal Challenges and Supreme Court Ruling
Realmuto’s agency sued the Trump administration in March for violating federal law by sending migrants to countries where they could be harmed. The lawsuit included the case of a Guatemalan man who was deported to Mexico, where he had been kidnapped and raped.
US District Judge Brian Murphy has temporarily barred the Trump administration from sending immigrants to third countries without first providing them written notice at least 10 days before for a “meaningful opportunity” to challenge the deportation. On June 23, the US Supreme Court’s conservative majority paused the district court’s order in a brief, unsigned statement that did not explain its reasoning, making way for the removals to resume.
Justice Sotomayor’s Dissent
Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented against the Supreme Court’s judgment, and along with Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, she warned that the court’s decision would put people at risk.
“In matters of life and death, it is best to proceed with caution,” she wrote. “In this case, the Government took the opposite approach.”
Details from the ICE Memo
ICE chief’s memo, which is based on guidance Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L Noem issued in March, permits removal based on assurances accepted by the US State Department. It says ICE can deport an individual to a third country within 24 hours of notifying them where they are being sent. Officials also don’t need to ask deportees if they fear going to a third country.
In case any immigrant does express a fear of being deported in the 24-hour period, Lyons’ memo said they will be screened for possible humanitarian protection under federal law and the Convention Against Torture– which was ratified by Congress in 1994 to stop governments from sending immigrants to a country where they might face torture.
The screenings will “generally” happen within a 24-hour window to determine if the deportee merits immigration court proceedings or humanitarian protection.
Conclusion: Implications of the New ICE Deportation Policy
The new ICE deportation policy represents a significant shift in how the United States handles immigration enforcement. By allowing deportations to third countries with minimal notice and without safety assurances, the policy raises serious ethical and legal concerns. The potential risks to individuals being deported, as highlighted by immigration lawyers and dissenting Supreme Court justices, cannot be ignored.
As this policy moves forward, it is essential to monitor its implementation and assess its impact on the lives of immigrants and the broader immigration landscape. The balance between national security and human rights must be carefully considered to ensure a fair and just immigration system.
Leave a Reply