Backdoor Amnesty in Portland Thanks to Judges Deportations of illegal aliens drop in the Northwest for second year
Deportations of illegal
immigrants aliens drop in the Northwest for second year
The number of deportations of illegal immigrants from Washington, Oregon and Alaska dropped by nearly 9 percent during the past fiscal year, while deportations of
immigrants illegal aliens considered convicted criminals were on the rise, according to new federal data.–
Report: Judges deny 63 percent of deportation requests
BY CINDY CARCAMO
Federal immigration judges in Los Angeles rejected 63 percent of deportation requests this year filed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials — the third highest number in the nation, according to a report by a data-gathering organization at Syracuse University.
One of the primary reasons for the rejections appears to be that judges found the government had no legitimate grounds for seeking a removal order, according to the report released Tuesday by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. The Los Angeles Immigration Court serves Orange County, as well as other surrounding counties.
Remember, thanks to our new enlightened policies Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials only seek to deport the most savage convicted criminals.
The number of denials in Los Angeles has significantly increased in the last couple of years, peaking in Fiscal Year 2010, according to the report. That rejection rate is mirrored in large cities such as New York City, Portland, and Miami. Los Angeles ranks third for highest deportation denials…
ICE officials said in a written statement that the administration is still committed to prioritizing the arrest and removal efforts of those who are in the country illegally that pose a danger to public safety.
“It appears that the report fails to take into account many factors, including the fact that immigration courts are independently authorized to allow illegal aliens to remain in the United States,” said the statement, released by ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice.
It would appear to us that the new Republican House of Representatives might want to take a long hard look at these immigration courts.
The report comes a little more than a month after Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced a record number of immigration removals at a Washington, D.C., press conference. The agency has touted their new focus on deporting the “worst of worst” people in the country illegally.
“In 2010, ICE has removed more than 195,000 convicted criminals — a record number,” Kice said in the statement.
Think about it. 63% of these convicted criminals – the “worst of the worst” – are being allowed to stay in the country thanks to (unelected) immigration judges.
The report stated that in Los Angeles, 27 percent of the cases were turned down in 2010 because the court determined there were no grounds for removal of the person in question. About 29 percent were granted some sort of relief to remain in the country…
Being in this country illegally and being convicted of a felony are not “grounds for removal”? And why should such people be granted any relief to stay in this country, unless it is to face imprisonment or execution?
Susan Long, co-author of the report, said they were unable to determine why there were no grounds for deportation in the cases in question because ICE officials refused to release the information…
“The poor targeting of government removal efforts documented by the Immigration Court data shows that scarce resources such as the investigative time of ICE agents are being wasted and that the ability of the government to deport those who should be removed from the country therefore has been reduced,” the report said. “Poor targeting that weakens the government is inefficient.”
Somehow we don’t think this is an accident.
But this stunning report aside, we still have to wonder why on earth we are deporting convicted criminals instead of locking them up. After all, they will surely just come back to the US.
Should we be deporting the ones we consider relatively harmless, since we are in effect just setting them free?