Thoughts While Reading a Report on Immigration Note: Look Below for Full Article Title

Title of Article: A national Study of Access to Counsel in Immigration Court. So I am working on a paper for a class the topic is 'The Future of Immigration Reform' (I will try to update the list as I go on with the research so the title may eventually be thrown out) Solutions are mine and mine only…
  1. 1.
    'Across the six year period studied, detained respondents went without Counsel 86% of the time. Revealing wide Geographic disparities in rep we find almost 90% of non detained immigrants in NYC secured counsel, compared to only .002% of detained in Tucson, Arizona' Page 9
  2. 2.
    Solution to Above: Ensure every state gives legal counsel to those detained… use the NYC program New York Immigrant Family Unity Project as the national blueprint… this is the first in the nation program to provide universal Court Appointed deportation defense counsel
  3. 3.
    'No right to appointed counsel at Government expense' P 14
  4. 4.
    'To assist immigrants in this process judges are required to distribute a list of free and low cost legal services to immigrants who appear before them…' P 14
  5. 5.
    'The filing of the EOIR-28 (Notice of Entry of Appearance) has provided the standard government metric for statistically analyzing whether an immigrant is 'represented' in immigration court. For example in EOIR's annual reports so long as the EOIR-28 form is filed @ some point during the lifetime of the litigation, the immigrant is counted as 'Rep'
    (Continued from Above) for the entire case. However this… has a shortcoming: the attorney may have joined the case only after the judge decided to order the immigrant removed or if the immigrant applied for relief after the judge denied the immigrants application to remain lawfully in the United States' P 15
  6. 6.
    Solution: Find a New Way to measure this…
  7. 7.
    'Once released represented immigrants were considerably more likely to appear in court: only 7% of non detained represented immigrants were removed in absentia, compared to 68% of pro se non detained respondents' Pgs 9-10
  8. 8.
    Startling Revelation… 'Increasing representation rates appear to be more a matter of decreasing volume of judicial decisions rather than increasing involvement of attorney representatives.' P 18
  9. 9.
    '63% of removal cases had no attorney representation by the time of the judge's merits decision' P. 19
  10. 10.
    'Finally while juveniles have higher than average representation rates, other vulnerable groups, such as immigrants held in prison or who stipulate to their removal are very unlikely to obtain representation.' P 25
    Solution: We need to establish a Federal Law that ensures those who are facing deportation will have adequate legal council