Thread: Federal judge questions immigration prosecutions

Federal judge questions immigration prosecutions
Sparks suggests it's too expensive to jail those without any significant criminal history.
Robert Godwin
Updated: 2:07 a.m. Saturday, Feb. 6, 2010

Published: 10:27 p.m. Friday, Feb. 5, 2010

In an order filed Friday, a federal judge in Austin questioned U.S. prosecutors for seeking criminal convictions in court against some illegal immigrants, writing that the practice "presents a cost to the American taxpayer ... that is neither meritorious nor reasonable."

The order by U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks comes as his docket, like others in Texas, is swollen with defendants charged with immigration crimes.

Most of those prosecuted in Austin have been identified by immigration officers at the Travis County Jail and charged with illegal entry after deportation.

Many of those defendants have no significant criminal history and until a change in enforcement strategy about two years ago would have been deported and not prosecuted.

Sparks entered the order in the cases against three Mexican citizens who have previously been deported and who returned to the United States without permission.

Last fall each was found in the Travis County Jail and charged with illegal re-entry.

The men all pleaded guilty and were sentenced Thursday by Sparks to the time they had already served and are being deported.

On Friday, Sparks wrote in the order that "like many of the defendants prosecuted under the (federal illegal re-entry law) in the last six months" the men "have no significant criminal history."

Sparks wrote that it has cost more than $13,350 to jail the three men and noted that charging them criminally means additional costs and work for prosecutors, defense lawyers, court personnel and others.

"The expenses of prosecuting illegal entry and re-entry cases (rather than deportation) on aliens without any significant criminal history is simply mind-boggling," Sparks wrote.

He said the assistant U.S. attorney who prosecuted the case could not state "a reason that these three defendants were prosecuted rather than simply removing them from the United States."

He ordered prosecutors to be prepared to state the reasons for prosecuting such cases.

Neither U.S. Attorney John Murphy nor his assistant who handled the cases in Sparks' court, Garth Backe, could be reached for comment.

Austin immigration lawyer Daniel Kowalski said Sparks' order was unique.

"They may have complained privately," he said, "but I am not aware of any federal district judge ... making any similar statement on the record" about the government's immigration enforcement.

Kowalski, who edits the online Bender's Immigration Bulletin, said the government made it clear several years ago that the goal of increasing the prosecution of even minor immigration crimes is to deter illegal immigration.

In part because of Operation Streamline, a Bush administration project aimed a bringing criminal charges against most immigration violators in certain border areas, the federal prosecution of immigration violators jumped nearly 9 percent during the 2009 fiscal year, according to researchers at Syracuse University who analyze Justice Department data.

For years federal prosecutors in Austin had a practice of prosecuting for illegal re-entry only immigrants who had previously committed an aggravated felony, such as rape, burglary or drug trafficking, or who had been deported and re-entered the country numerous times.

Since March 2008, there has been a steady flow of cases in Austin charging some immigrants who have minor or no criminal histories with illegal re-entry.

Steve Mason of Austin, a member of several immigration reform groups, including the Immigration Reform Coalition of Texas, said that federal prosecutors need to do more — not less — to target immigration law violators.

"If you come into this country illegally, you should be prosecuted for it," he said.

"They are ... breaking into this country, they are displacing the American worker ... and I don't stand for that. "

It was unclear from federal court filings how two of the men whose cases prompted Sparks' order landed in jail.

A lawyer for the third, Victor Arana, said his client, Angel Hernandez-Garcia, was arrested on Halloween on a charge of driving while intoxicated.

Arana said his client, who has since pleaded guilty to the DWI charge, had been living in Austin with his wife and two children and working in construction.

His client, he said, is not a criminal.

"These are tough cases because there are families involved," Arana said.

"The only difference is he was born on one side and we were born on the other side," he said.

skreytak@statesman.com

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/fed ... =rss_local

Most of those prosecuted in Austin have been identified by immigration officers at the Travis County Jail and charged with illegal entry after deportation.

Many of those defendants have no significant criminal history and until a change in enforcement strategy about two years ago would have been deported and not prosecuted.

Uh, re-entry after being deported is a FELONY! These men will be right back next week, they have proven they willfully ignore the law.

"If you come into this country illegally, you should be prosecuted for it," he said.

"They are ... breaking into this country, they are displacing the American worker ... and I don't stand for that. "

Amen, brother!

Make the IA's work off the cost of their incarceration by working in AG or cleaning our roadsides etc. They may think twice about re-entry then.