Recommendations Regarding Detained Asylum Seekers

From the Heartland Alliance’s National Immigrant Justice Center:

Heartland Alliance’s National Immigrant Justice Center and 30 other national and international immigrant and human rights organizations, think tanks, and academics have petitioned the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ) to issue regulations allowing the release of detained asylum seekers who pose no danger to the community and would face persecution if returned to their home countries.

According to the report, in 2006, “of the 5,761 asylum seekers who were detained, 1,559 (27%) were detained for more than 180 days.”  The report continues: “On average, arriving aliens who eventually obtain asylum spend 10 months in detention.”  The report discusses the mental and physical effects of detention on asylum seekers, and also notes that the cost of detaining asylum seekers averages $95 per person per day–from 2003 to 2009, we spent more than $300 million to detain asylum seekers.  The report recommends regulatory changes to allow more detained asylum seekers to be released prior to their final hearings. 

As usual, this problem is also a question of the asylum seeker’s financial situation and access to counsel.  Represented asylum seekers who are eligible for release (and who can afford to pay the bond) will almost always be released in a month or two.  The poorest and most vulnerable asylum seekers are the most likely to remain detained.  Case in point: I received a call today from a woman whose sister was threatened by gang members in El Salvador.  She fled the country, crossed the border illegally, and was detained.  She is currently being held in Eloy, Arizona, and has already made a claim for asylum.  The sister is looking for an attorney in Arizona to prepare an application for bond.  I referred her to the Florence Project, an excellent legal services organization that assists immigrants detained in Arizona.  If the woman can secure a bond, the chances of her asylum claim succeeding will be much improved.  If she remains detained, she will have to prepare her case and gather evidence–such as letters from witnesses, police reports, and medical reports–from behind bars.  Under those circumstances, I imagine the chances for her to succeed are pretty slim.

Immigration “Consultants” and Fraud

When asylum seekers arrive in the United States, they are often unfamiliar with how to file for asylum and how to find help with their cases.  Such people commonly hire “consultants” (or “notarios” in the Spanish-speaking community) to assist them.  The consultants prepare the case and sometimes attend the asylum interview as an interpreter.  They charge a fee–often the same or a little cheaper than a legitimate attorney.  Sometimes these cases succeed and asylum is granted.  More frequently, the case is denied and referred to the Immigration Court.  Other times, the consultant just takes the money and runs. 

The ABA (American Bar Association) has created a program called Fight Notario Fraud to help report and crack down on consultant fraud.   From the ABA website:

Unscrupulous “notarios” or “immigration consultants” have become an increasingly serious problem in immigrant communities throughout the United States. Often using false advertising and fraudulent contracts, notarios hold themselves out as qualified to help immigrants obtain lawful status, or perform legal functions such as drafting wills or other legal documents. Unethical Notarios may charge a lot of money for help that they never provide. Often, victims permanently lose opportunities to pursue immigration relief because a notario has damaged their case. The [American Bar Association] Commission is working to provide immigrant communities with information about this dangerous practice, and to support advocates who represent victims.

Unfortunately, as the ABA notes, consultant “fraud is usually identified after the fact, when an immigrant has already suffered an adverse event as the result of a consultant’s services.”  If you have been a victim of consultant fraud, you can report the fraud to the ABA, and they may be able to assit you.  Submit your contact information and a description of the problem here.

How Confidential Is the Asylum Process?

Asylum in the United States is meant to be a confidential process.  However, it is not uncommon for the BIA and the federal circuit courts to identify asylum seekers by name in their decisions, and to describe the applicants’ claims of persecution.  We lawyers sometimes wonder whether anyone in the home country ever learns about such cases.

In a recent example from the Ninth Circuit, a Cambodian couple was denied asylum before the Immigration Judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals.  They filed a petition for review with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which was denied. See Kin v. Holder, No. 05-73079 (9th Cir. Feb. 18, 2010).  Someone in Cambodia was paying attention, and the case recently appeared in the English language Phnom Penh Post:

Two Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) members who say they were tortured by authorities after participating in a 1998 political rally have had their bid for political asylum in the United States blocked by an appeal court there. In a legal opinion filed on Thursday, Judge Richard C Tallman of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an earlier ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) rejecting the pair’s asylum requests, saying their asylum claim was riddled with inconsistencies.

The article goes on to identify the couple by name, and to describe their claims of persecution in detail.  The article concludes:

Senior CPP [Cambodian People’s Party – the ruling party of Cambodia] lawmaker Cheam Yeap could not confirm or deny the validity of the allegations raised by Kin Sambath and Prak Bunnary, but stated that peddling falsehood was not uncommon for the opposition. “It is characteristic of the SRP that they raise untrue issues because they want to live in a third country,” he said.

Now that the Ninth Circuit’s decision has exposed the names and stories of the two asylum seekers and a “Senior CPP lawmaker” is aware of their claims, they may have an argument to reopen their case in the U.S.: Even if their initial stories were not credible, the Cambodian government has become aware that they applied for asylum in the United States.  The very fact that they made this application–and accused the Cambodian government of persecuting them–might result in the government punishing them upon their return.  And that may be enough to support a new claim for asylum.

An Insider’s View of the Asylum System

Mesfin (not his real name) fled Ethiopia to escape political persecution.  Once he reached the United States, he filed for political asylum.  Four years, four attorneys, and thousands of dollars later, Mesfin’s journey finally came to an end when an Immigration Judge granted his application for asylum earlier this week.  “When [my claim] was denied at USCIS, I had another chance with the Immigration Judge, and when [my claim] was denied there, I had another chance with the BIA [Board of Immigration Appeals],” a happy and relieved Mesfin said in an interview the day after his asylum grant.

It is not surprising that refugees who have completed a long odyssey through the Immigration Courts would have familiarized themselves with the procedural framework of the process.  It is likewise unsurprising that such immigrants, if successful, would come to have an appreciation for the principles of due process that underlie the layered review of immigration cases.  Still, Mesfin’s conversance with these concepts is impressive.  In recounting his case, the computer science student sounded every bit the law student, using terms like “clearly erroneous” and “credibility determination” as he discussed such concepts as burden shifting and appellate posture. 

Certain items in Mesfin’s files offer other clues about the traits that made him such a ready student of the immigration system.  Mesfin’s transcript from Addis Ababa University, for instance, shows that he carried a 4.0 GPA and needed only a thesis defense to complete his master’s degree.  That thesis defense, which was to be delivered in 2005, never did get made.  The reasons for this were the same events in 2005 that prompted Mesfin’s flight from Ethiopia, a large, ethnically diverse country ruled by an authoritarian government that keeps power by pitting different ethnic groups against each.

The current Ethiopian government, which The Economist has characterized as a “hybrid regime” situated between a “flawed democracy” and an “authoritarian regime,” cracked down hard on protestors in the aftermath of contested parliamentary elections in 2005.  A government ban on protests was imposed throughout the election period, but the repression got much worse for opposition party members (including Mesfin) after the disputed results.  Police are said to have massacred 193 protestors, according to a reported prepared by a since-exiled Ethiopian judge who was appointed by the Prime Minister to investigate the killings.  More than 100 opposition leaders were arrested and charged with treason and “attempted genocide.”  Hundreds more rank-and-file opposition party members on college campuses – including Mesfin – were arrested for mobilizing political opposition to protest the election results, which they regarded as fraudulent. 

He was detained for eight days and was interrogated, beaten, threatened, deprived of sleep, denied food and medicine, and held incommunicado – without the opportunity to consult an attorney and without word to his family about his whereabouts. 

“The prison cell I was in was filled with many prisoners,” he would later say. “[At night], they would wake me up and splash me with dirty water for sleep deprivation and mental torture.  [During] interrogation, the investigators warned me that my life would be taken because of links with anti-government bodies….  I was denied bail rights and court appearances since there was no evidence of wrong doing.  I was not charged with any crime.  But still, I was kept in jail and abused.  I got no justice or due process of law.”

Mesfin was released from his illegal detention after eight days, and only after a previously released cellmate contacted his cousin who arranged an expensive bribe that secured his release.  It was then that he resolved to flee the country to avoid further persecution.  The sense of urgency that fueled that decision was evidenced by the fact that he felt compelled to depart within weeks of release – and just two weeks before the 4.0 student was scheduled to defend his thesis.

But the hastiness of his escape would later make things difficult, Mesfin said, noting that the initial rejections of his asylum claim by USCIS officials and the Immigration Judge were based in part on a lack of documentary evidence to corroborate his account of being beaten and jailed.  “All you are thinking about is leaving,” he explained.  “You’re not thinking about the documents you’ll need” to later make an asylum claim.  And even if he was thinking ahead and about those matters, “I didn’t know any lawyers [in Ethiopia] who could tell me” what was needed.  Fortunately for him, Mesfin was finally able to convince the U.S. government that he needed protection.  Now, after four years, he hopes to return to school and begin his life again.