Hunt Illegal Aliens

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House OKs ban on licenses for illegal immigrants
Bill also encourages bounty hunters to track down those ordered deported
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington Bureau

Friday, February 11, 2005

Washington -- The House, with proponents arguing for a more effective war against terrorists, overwhelmingly passed a bill Thursday that would make it practically impossible for California and other states to issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

The legislation included a last-minute amendment that would encourage bounty hunters to track down hundreds of thousands of immigrants whom courts have ordered deported -- which opponents likened to efforts to round up slaves before the Civil War.

Most of the majority Republicans joined 42 Democrats in the final 261-161 vote for a bill that also makes it harder for asylum seekers to succeed in their claims and waives a host of laws in allowing the Department of Homeland Security to order completion of a 14-mile, three-tier fence along the San Diego-Tijuana border and similar border barriers along the country's boundaries with Mexico and Canada.

The bill faces an uncertain future in the Senate, where senators object to some of the provisions and may favor taking a broader approach to changes in the immigration laws. House sponsors led by Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said the goal of the legislation approved Thursday was to keep terrorists out of the country, not to deal with the immigration issue.

The bounty hunter provision was a last-minute addition by Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas. He said only 13 percent of the 400,000 people ordered deported by immigration judges had actually been sent back to their countries of origin, including those from countries linked to terrorism such as Iran and Sudan. Bounty hunting -- legal in most states including California -- is an additional way to enforce those court orders, he added.

Federal law already makes it legal for bounty hunters to capture those ordered deported, but Session's amendment would encourage the practice by establishing 10 centers around the country where bounty hunters could turn in deportees to immigration authorities.

"We need to make sure that those ordered deported are deported,'' Sessions told the House, which passed the amendment without a roll-call vote. "We need to use the tools we have to enforce the laws of the United States.''

Democratic opponents attacked the idea, saying the amendment had been introduced Wednesday evening and had never gone through hearings.

"The truly frightening aspect of this is it smacks of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850,'' said Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas.

"You can be assured that in a discriminatory fashion you'll be rounding up people who look or speak differently,'' she added.

The slave law, part of the Compromise of 1850, said that blacks suspected of being runaway slaves could be arrested anywhere in the country, even in states that had abolished slavery.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, said, "I think it's really a bad idea. Unprecedented.

"If that becomes law, we will end up with violence that people will regret greatly. We have law enforcement officers to enforce the law, not vigilantes.''

Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which opposed the entire bill, said the bounty hunter provision was shameful.

"It illustrates the extremism of the House,'' added Butterfield. She said she doubted the Sessions provision would survive in the Senate.

Traci Hong, director of policy at the National Asian-Pacific American Legal Consortium, said Sessions' amendment would allow bail bondsmen to pick up people before a final deportation order had been issued. It also requires a minimum bond of $10,000 in deportation cases.

"It's all incredibly alarming to anyone who represents the immigrant community,'' she said.

But Dan Stein, president of the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform, said the amendment provided immigration authorities with a "super- force multiplier.''

"How many years have to go by before these absconders are caught and not deported?'' asked Stein, whose group favors tougher immigration-law enforcement.

The other provisions in the bill were part of legislation Sensenbrenner wanted to include last fall as Congress rushed to adopt the recommendations of the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission. His ideas were pulled because the Senate found them too controversial, but GOP leaders promised him a vote on his bill in the new Congress.

_________________
Lance Allen Wilkinson
Recoveries by L.A.W.
Serving since 1984
“What is sought is found... what is overlooked escapes” (Oedipus Rex)

Great info. Thanks for the post L.A.W.

_________________
Don Herbert
Surety Administrators, Inc.
645 Penn St. 4th Floor
Reading, PA. 19601
610-372-8811 xt 262

Absolutely fascinating.

This is a curious one to watch. I heard tale that the Senate may strike it down in its current form.

LAW, what is your take on the bounties for immigrants? As matters stand now, I can pick up a bail skip who is not a legal citizen and book that person into the county jail where the case originated.

I'm not clear from the article concerning what exactly is different from the current state of affairs.

Rex

It sounds like this could get confusing, I took it to mean that as BEA's go you could have the right to pick up these cases whether or not it comes from a Bondsman and return them to a proposed one of 10 locations.

I guess we will all have to wait and see what the Senate does. I know that a few companies would be greatful for the openess of being able to place these people back into custody a lot easier than the current standards require.

Great post L.A.W.

Rex,
I can pick up a bail skip who is not a legal citizen and book that person into the county jail where the case originated.

This can only be done when the illegal has an outstanding criminal case(s) with the county or court you are surrendering in. It is then up to I.C.E. (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) to then place a detainer or hold on the defendant, allowing I.C.E. to then take custody of the defendent and deport if necassary after the defendant's criminal charges are addressed.

The change(s) will directly affect illegal immigrants whose only charge is an immigration violation. Currently the only facilities that will accept the surrender of an illegal immigrant, that has a final order of removal from the United States, will be the detention and deportation units of I.C.E. Such as Philadelphia-1600 Callowhill Street, New York City-26 Federal Plaza etc. Of which most states only have 1 office and some none at all The bill allows for 10 facilities outside of I.C.E. to take into custody the finally ordered immigrants whenever they are presented, either by LE or be BEA's.

I hope this helps.

_________________
Don Herbert
Surety Administrators, Inc.
645 Penn St. 4th Floor
Reading, PA. 19601
610-372-8811 xt 262

Dherbert73, That would be a welcomed addition if it passes in that format. Some ICE facilities are almost impossible to deal with. I am wondering if they are considering certain County Facilities or building new facilities to handle this.

From what I understand the 10 facilities would be county/state jail facilities that currently handle some amount of immigrant detention. Such as Berks County Prison here in PA has an entire cell block of the jail devoted to nothing but immigration detainees. Some county/state facilities do currently have contracts with I.C.E. to hold these same detainees however, I.C.E. is the the ONLY enforcement entity that can deliver and surrender to these same jails. In my opinion I.C.E. and the public at large would be better served by initiating a computer database that would allow any detention facility or LE agency across the country to ID and obtain all legal documentation to incarcerate the defendant. FYI; when the Department of Homeland Security was established they had (I believe) 13 completely separate computer systems with no way to link any of the information between offices.

_________________
Don Herbert
Surety Administrators, Inc.
645 Penn St. 4th Floor
Reading, PA. 19601
610-372-8811 xt 262

HoundDog,
Sorry, I forgot to add this. Which I.C.E. facilities have you had trouble with? I may have a contact or 2 that can help if needed.

_________________
Don Herbert
Surety Administrators, Inc.
645 Penn St. 4th Floor
Reading, PA. 19601
610-372-8811 xt 262

Don, We have had problems in a great many of the ICE facilities. Texas, Florida, New York, California, Minnesota to name a few. In all cases the Circuit Court Judge has ordered them placed into custody or their time to vacate the U.S. has expired and, in every case ICE has refused to take them because the Federal Courts have not issued a warrant for them. How are the bondsman supposed to comply with a judges order to save them from paying the bond when the ICE facilities refuse to take them? This is why I always tell people to stay away from INS cases thay are almost impossible without a Federal warrant to get a bondsman off the hook for the bond. I guess you could take them to the Circuit Judge that ordered them picked up and surrender them to him but, this is not always pratical. Some of our cases are from Minnesota with the alien living in Texas.

I am hoping that the new legislation will make it easier to surrender the aliens for our clients.

Robert,
I.C.E. can no longer refuse the surrender of an alien if that alien has an "administratively final order of removal". The problem with this is that per the bonding contract I.C.E. has the ability and right to breach the bond if the alien is not surrendered to the same district office that produced the order to deliver or I-340 deportation notice. On the same note, I.C.E. and the deportation officer assigned to the case also has the authority to cancel that bond regardless of location of surrender. The Deport Officer and District Directors have final say over each and every bond breach and cancellation. I have seen bonds in breach status for more than 1 year be cancelled upon surrender of alien ie; each case is different. Most times the real problem is that the office where the alien is being surrendered to does not have the appropriate paperwork in order to detain the alien. This information is no more than a fax away however, it seems that I.C.E. works at snails pace and if you are giving them even more work to do then they will say and do anything to get a BEA out of their way. Calls to the district office informing a deportation officer that an alien with a final order will be surrendered can be a great help. The officer then can obtain all the paperwork needed prior to the arrival of the BEA and alien.

If at anytime you require help with contacts at district offices or obtaining information etc. please let me know. I am happy to help in anyway that I can. I as well hope that the new legislation will not only help with the surrender process but also with the cancellation of the bonds for your clients as well as SAI.

_________________
Don Herbert
Surety Administrators, Inc.
645 Penn St. 4th Floor
Reading, PA. 19601
610-372-8811 xt 262