美国移民法院:美国系统性移民失败的垃圾场:法院积压的原因、构成和政治上困难的解决方案

Donald M. Kerwin, Evin Millet
{"title":"美国移民法院:美国系统性移民失败的垃圾场:法院积压的原因、构成和政治上困难的解决方案","authors":"Donald M. Kerwin, Evin Millet","doi":"10.1177/23315024231175379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The US immigration court system seeks to “fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly administer and interpret US immigration laws” (DOJ 2022a). It represents the first exposure of many immigrants to due process and the rule of law in the United States, and occupies an integral role in the larger US immigration system. Yet it labors under a massive backlog of pending cases that undermines its core goals and objectives. The backlog reached 1.87 million cases in the first quarter of FY 2023 (Straut-Eppsteiner 2023, 6). This paper attributes the backlog to systemic failures in the broader immigration system that negatively affect the immigration courts, such as: Visa backlogs, United States Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS) application processing delays, and other bottlenecks in legal immigration processes. The immense disparity in funding between the court system and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agencies that feed cases into the courts. The failure of Congress to pass broad immigration reform legislation that could ease pressure on the enforcement and court systems. The lack of standard judicial authorities vested in Immigration Judges (IJs), limiting their ability to close cases; pressure parties to “settle” cases; and manage their dockets. The absence of a statute of limitations for civil immigration offenses. Past DHS failures to establish and adhere to enforcement priorities and to exercise prosecutorial discretion (PD) throughout the removal adjudication process, including in initial decisions to prosecute. The location of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which oversees US immigration courts, within the nation’s preeminent law enforcement agency, the Department of Justice (DOJ). The misconception of many policymakers that the court system should primarily serve as an adjunct to DHS. A past record of temporary judge reassignments and government shutdowns. The paper supports a well-resourced and independent immigration court system devoted to producing the right decisions under the law. Following a short introduction, a long section on “Causes and Solutions to the Backlog” examines the multi-faceted causes of the backlog, and offers an integrated, wide-ranging set of recommendations to reverse and ultimately eliminate the backlog. The “Conclusion” summarizes the paper’s topline findings and policy proposals.","PeriodicalId":90638,"journal":{"name":"Journal on migration and human security","volume":"1 1","pages":"194 - 227"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The US Immigration Courts, Dumping Ground for the Nation’s Systemic Immigration Failures: The Causes, Composition, and Politically Difficult Solutions to the Court Backlog\",\"authors\":\"Donald M. Kerwin, Evin Millet\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23315024231175379\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The US immigration court system seeks to “fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly administer and interpret US immigration laws” (DOJ 2022a). It represents the first exposure of many immigrants to due process and the rule of law in the United States, and occupies an integral role in the larger US immigration system. Yet it labors under a massive backlog of pending cases that undermines its core goals and objectives. The backlog reached 1.87 million cases in the first quarter of FY 2023 (Straut-Eppsteiner 2023, 6). This paper attributes the backlog to systemic failures in the broader immigration system that negatively affect the immigration courts, such as: Visa backlogs, United States Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS) application processing delays, and other bottlenecks in legal immigration processes. The immense disparity in funding between the court system and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agencies that feed cases into the courts. The failure of Congress to pass broad immigration reform legislation that could ease pressure on the enforcement and court systems. The lack of standard judicial authorities vested in Immigration Judges (IJs), limiting their ability to close cases; pressure parties to “settle” cases; and manage their dockets. The absence of a statute of limitations for civil immigration offenses. Past DHS failures to establish and adhere to enforcement priorities and to exercise prosecutorial discretion (PD) throughout the removal adjudication process, including in initial decisions to prosecute. The location of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which oversees US immigration courts, within the nation’s preeminent law enforcement agency, the Department of Justice (DOJ). The misconception of many policymakers that the court system should primarily serve as an adjunct to DHS. A past record of temporary judge reassignments and government shutdowns. The paper supports a well-resourced and independent immigration court system devoted to producing the right decisions under the law. Following a short introduction, a long section on “Causes and Solutions to the Backlog” examines the multi-faceted causes of the backlog, and offers an integrated, wide-ranging set of recommendations to reverse and ultimately eliminate the backlog. The “Conclusion” summarizes the paper’s topline findings and policy proposals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90638,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal on migration and human security\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"194 - 227\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal on migration and human security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23315024231175379\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal on migration and human security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23315024231175379","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

美国移民法院系统寻求“公平、迅速、统一地管理和解释美国移民法”(DOJ 2022a)。它代表了许多移民首次接触到美国的正当程序和法治,并在更大的美国移民体系中发挥着不可或缺的作用。然而,它在大量未决案件的积压下工作,这破坏了它的核心目标和宗旨。在2023财年第一季度,积压案件达到187万件(Straut-Eppsteiner 2023,6)。本文将积压归因于更广泛的移民系统的系统性失败,这些系统性失败对移民法院产生了负面影响,例如:签证积压、美国公民和移民服务局(USCIS)申请处理延迟以及合法移民流程中的其他瓶颈。法院系统和向法院提供案件的国土安全部(DHS)机构在资金上的巨大差距。国会未能通过广泛的移民改革立法,这可能会减轻执法和法院系统的压力。移民法官缺乏标准的司法权力,限制了他们结案的能力;迫使当事人“和解”案件;管理他们的案卷。民事移民犯罪没有法定诉讼时效。过去,国土安全部未能在整个递解裁定过程中(包括最初的起诉决定)确立和坚持执法优先事项,并行使起诉自由裁量权。负责监管美国移民法庭的移民审查执行办公室(EOIR)位于美国最杰出的执法机构司法部(DOJ)内。许多政策制定者错误地认为法院系统应该主要作为国土安全部的附属机构。过去的临时法官调动和政府关闭记录。本文支持建立一个资源充足、独立的移民法庭系统,致力于根据法律做出正确的裁决。在简短的介绍之后,关于“积压的原因和解决方案”的一长节检查了积压的多方面原因,并提供了一组集成的、广泛的建议,以扭转并最终消除积压。“结论”部分总结了论文的主要发现和政策建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The US Immigration Courts, Dumping Ground for the Nation’s Systemic Immigration Failures: The Causes, Composition, and Politically Difficult Solutions to the Court Backlog
The US immigration court system seeks to “fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly administer and interpret US immigration laws” (DOJ 2022a). It represents the first exposure of many immigrants to due process and the rule of law in the United States, and occupies an integral role in the larger US immigration system. Yet it labors under a massive backlog of pending cases that undermines its core goals and objectives. The backlog reached 1.87 million cases in the first quarter of FY 2023 (Straut-Eppsteiner 2023, 6). This paper attributes the backlog to systemic failures in the broader immigration system that negatively affect the immigration courts, such as: Visa backlogs, United States Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS) application processing delays, and other bottlenecks in legal immigration processes. The immense disparity in funding between the court system and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agencies that feed cases into the courts. The failure of Congress to pass broad immigration reform legislation that could ease pressure on the enforcement and court systems. The lack of standard judicial authorities vested in Immigration Judges (IJs), limiting their ability to close cases; pressure parties to “settle” cases; and manage their dockets. The absence of a statute of limitations for civil immigration offenses. Past DHS failures to establish and adhere to enforcement priorities and to exercise prosecutorial discretion (PD) throughout the removal adjudication process, including in initial decisions to prosecute. The location of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which oversees US immigration courts, within the nation’s preeminent law enforcement agency, the Department of Justice (DOJ). The misconception of many policymakers that the court system should primarily serve as an adjunct to DHS. A past record of temporary judge reassignments and government shutdowns. The paper supports a well-resourced and independent immigration court system devoted to producing the right decisions under the law. Following a short introduction, a long section on “Causes and Solutions to the Backlog” examines the multi-faceted causes of the backlog, and offers an integrated, wide-ranging set of recommendations to reverse and ultimately eliminate the backlog. The “Conclusion” summarizes the paper’s topline findings and policy proposals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信