|
|
|
| Все об эмиграции |
| Operation Compliance - как вам такая новость? |
Elena
Hayward |
Народ, как вам такая фишка, я лично в легком шоке... получается, можешь прийти на свой immigration court, а выйти только под залог...
U.S. testing plan to jail immigration case losers
Crackdown aimed at those who may defy orders to leave
By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar
Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times
Published April 26, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Tens of thousands of foreigners allowed to remain free while they pursue immigration appeals could face arrest and jail under a major policy change being tested by the federal government.
Introduced with little fanfare this month in Atlanta and Denver as a pilot program, Operation Compliance is designed to curb the chronic problem of "absconders" -- an estimated 300,000 to 400,000 scofflaws in the United States in defiance of orders to leave.
Under the pilot program, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers are assigned to immigration courts and promptly arrest people who are ordered to leave the country after losing their cases, which are usually civil, not criminal. They are held in immigration detention sites until they exhaust their appeals or post bond.
"It's a great initiative, and if it was implemented nationwide, it would be a great step," said Steven Branch, a senior immigration enforcement official in Washington. "It's a drastic step in minimizing any future growth of absconders."
But immigration lawyers say the program has singled out people with no criminal records, who are pursuing their rights within the U.S. legal system. Often, the lawyers said, bail is set higher than those detained can possibly afford. They also argue that Operation Compliance gives no consideration to asylum seekers, whose accounts of persecution in their homelands are often heart-wrenching but sometimes difficult to assess.
Generally, foreigners who appealed an immigration decision were allowed to remain free. Those who lost and agreed to leave the country voluntarily were generally given time to get their affairs in order, usually after posting a modest bond.
The policy has been abused, the government says. Officials estimate that nearly 90 percent of those who are ordered to leave the country but not detained end up staying in defiance of the law.
"What we are doing is having the alien comply with the law [and] saving the taxpayers' dollar," Branch said. "Instead of these people receiving an order and then blatantly disregarding it by staying here, us taking them right there allows us to stem the growth of any additional absconders."
A smaller-scale test of Operation Compliance was carried out last fall in Hartford, Conn., with inconclusive results. If tests go well in Atlanta and Denver, the program could be expanded to larger cities. Eventually, it could become part of the Homeland Security Department's strategy for expelling all foreigners who are found deportable, a six-year plan known as Endgame.
It remains unclear whether the immigration system could handle such a program on a national scale.
Immigration authorities have only about 20,000 detention beds available nationwide at any given time, and priority is given to detainees with criminal records. Adding the civil cases from immigration courts could swamp detention facilities, particularly in immigrant hubs such as New York and Los Angeles.
Last year, the government deported about 182,000 foreigners, of which nearly 60 percent were not criminals.
"It's a poor use of government resources to keep these people in jail indefinitely," said Crystal Williams, the American Immigration Lawyers Association's liaison to Homeland Security.
"Just because a removal order has been issued doesn't mean a case is over," she added. "Martha Stewart isn't in jail."
Lawyers also say Operation Compliance has taken an inflexible approach to sometimes-complex situations.
Consider the case of a 34-year-old African farmer jailed in Denver. The farmer, Amadou Wouldou Diallo, fled his homeland of Mauritania during a 1989 outbreak of ethnic v
|
| |
Lev Kobrin
Miami |
Response for: Elena at 4/26/2004 8:22:00 PM
Все это ужасно. Как раз поэтому в Конгрессе и не хотят принимать закон, предложенный Бушем. Но, к счастью, ни все разделяют такую точку зрения. Вот, например,:
“Some argue that we should raise the drawbridge and not allow in any more foreign visitors. They are wrong. Such a move would hand a victory to the terrorists by having us betray our most cherished principles. For our own nation’s well being, and because we have so much to give, we must keep our doors open to the world….Openness is fundamental to our success as a nation, economically, culturally and politically. Our economy will sputter unless America remains the
magnet for entrepreneurs from across the world. Our culture will stagnate unless we continue to add new richness to our mosaic. And our great national mission of spreading freedom will founder if our own society closes its shutters to new people and ideas.”
--Secretary of State Colin Powell, Wall Street Journal Commentary, April 21, 2004
Лев Кобрин - имя, которому верят!!!
|
| |
Guest
aspen |
Response for: Lev Kobrin at 4/28/2004 7:15:00 PM
А у меня как раз суд в Денвере. То есть получается если я его не выиграю меня сразу же "закроют"???????????? Лев поясните пожалуйста. Может мы что-то не так поняли?
|
| |
Lev Kobrin
Miami |
Response for: Guest at 4/30/2004 2:34:00 PM
да кто ж это знает? Еще же нет никакой информации. В любом случае, если даже судья выносит отрицательное решение, но Вы подаете на аппеляцию, что должно быть в этом случае?
Лев Кобрин - имя, которому верят!!!
|
|
| | | 
| | | |
