Thread: Feds start "no bond" policy on detained immigrants

Feds start "no bond" policy on detained immigrants

By Guillermo Contreras
August 27, 2014 | Updated: August 27, 2014 7:11pm

SAN ANTONIO - One by one, young Central American mothers at an immigration detention center in Karnes City told a judge Wednesday in San Antonio via videoconference that they have relatives or others waiting to receive them here.

Some cited fears of persecution if they returned to their native countries.

"Anywhere except El Salvador," Veronica Perez told Immigration Judge Glenn P. McPhaul, when he asked what country should be listed for return if she were deported. "I don't want to go back ... I'm very afraid."

Case-by-case
But if the government has its way, Perez and her two young children detained with her in Karnes City are going nowhere. McPhaul set their bail hearing for Sept. 10.

As shown in Wednesday's hearings, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is now seeking no bond or high bond for immigrants detained at the 537-bed Karnes County Residential Center, including those who pass a credible fear interview - the first hurdle to gaining asylum - even if they present no flight risk or threat.

"Bond decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, based on considerations of risk of flight and public safety. These cases are screened by ICE and detention has been deemed appropriate," said Nina Pruneda, spokeswoman for ICE in San Antonio.

"Adults with children maintain important rights, including the ability to seek asylum, appeal to an immigration judge the denial of a credible fear finding, and the ability to seek legal representation. The Justice Department and DHS have prioritized these cases and devoted resources such that asylum officers are on site to conduct credible-fear screenings," she said.

Threats reported
But immigration advocates also report hearing claims from women at the for-profit facility of practices meant to discourage them from seeking asylum.

Among them are threats by officers to deport women if they "don't control their children;" difficulties in obtaining legal help; maintaining prison-like practices such as performing head counts of children.

Advocates also say immigration officers are conducting credible fear interviews of women in the presence of their children or other women, and are denying lawyers the ability to screen women and children separately.

Immigration advocates say some women may not reveal sexual abuse, or other sensitive details of their persecution, in front of their kids or others out of fear.

The advocates also argue that screening women and children together makes it difficult to determine if a child is being trafficked by an adult, since there have been cases of parents selling their children into servitude or traffickers posing as parents.

"We were told resident advisers would be providing child care, so the mother could go by herself to the 'know-your-rights' orientation," said Elizabeth Hartman, executive director of American Gateways in Austin, which provides the orientation at Karnes. "That has not been the case at all.

"When we go down there ... it's total chaos and there's no way those poor women can focus on what they're trying to learn."

National security
In court paperwork in the Karnes cases, ICE prosecutors are serving immigrants with bond packets that include affidavits opposing bond requests because of national security, a policy pushed by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson to send a message that "we'll send you back.

"Since October, nearly 60,000 immigrants from Central America have flocked to the United States, most through Texas.

"Even if the women have passed their credible fear interviews and have strong asylum claims, the government is arguing that no women should be released under any circumstances for the duration of their cases," said Barbara Hines, co-director of the Immigration Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law. "Keeping mothers and children detained is the most extreme position the government could take."

The suit accuses officials of raising numerous legal and practical hurdles to discourage migrants from seeking asylum, after deciding in advance that few petitions would succeed.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news...ts-5716913.php

Originally Posted by Barbara Hines, co-director of the Immigration Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law

Keeping mothers and children detained is the most extreme position the government could take.

Even worse than splitting up families, and so much worse than sending them back to their nations of origin.

Better that the judges impose the humanitarian alternative to detention: deportation of these families, keeping them together.

Sexual abuse is now "persecution"? Really? Well, in America it's just a crime, and I don't think the criminal laws in Central America are all that different.