Attorney General Merrick Garland On Thursday the immigration judges returned the power to order the administration to close in some cases Deportation, A valuable optional tool retired by the then Attorney General in 2018, Jeff sessions, Under the framework of the Migration Policy of ‘Zero Tolerance’.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) said in a statement that “as the regulation progresses, the Court of Appeals and the Board of Immigration Judges and the Board (Immigration Appeals -BIA-) should apply the standard for administrative closure established in the Matter of Avedicity, unless otherwise noted.”
“I rescind the Board’s decision of July 31, 2018 and return the case to the Board to proceed in accordance with this opinion,” Carland pointed out in the judgment.
In consideration, Garland also said it would overturn a second ruling handed down by the sessions on December 27, 2018, where it was decided that “immigration courts are not authorized to use the administrative closure tool”.
The DOJ explained that administrative closure was “a record management tool used to temporarily suspend deportation activities.”
The lawyers, who were consulted by Univision Notice, pointed out that the decision taken by Attorney General Garland would be crucial in eliminating immigration courts and advancing the process of qualifying immigrants to use the tool.
“The most important verdict,” said Jose Guerrero, an immigration lawyer trained in Miami, Florida. “The reversal of the rulings handed down by the sessions in 2018 empowers immigration judges so that they can administratively close deportation cases at an early stage.”
Guerrero also said the administrative closure “makes the system more efficient”.
As for who would be in favor of the Attorney General’s opinion, he pointed out that “those who are in favor are those who have been deported and are at an early stage before the verdict is handed down.” The judge may close the case or close it and send it to the Immigration Service (USCIS), in which case there is a legal way to obtain residency (green card or green card).
“To qualify, the person must show that they have been in the United States for a long time, have no criminal record and have an established family,” he said. “Individuals who believe they are entitled to this benefit should speak with their attorneys before the case is concluded or before the court renders a final decision,” he warned.
In the opinion of Garland, he points out that the rehabilitated administrative closure tool “does not settle or dismiss the case, but rather removes a file from the Immigration Judge’s active calendar or board file.”
Immigration judges have used administrative closure “for decades” and by mid-2018 it had become “the usual tool used to regulate procedures” to “manage the immigration judge’s schedule (or board file) appeals -BIA-)”.
Garland said administrative locking has been used by immigration judges “for at least three decades” in “appropriate circumstances.”
After the Immigration Act (INA) decided that immigration judges are not allowed to close administrative cases before their own courts, sessions in 2018 stopped the administrative closure tool, even those that could be resolved by other federal bodies.
The decision of the then Attorney General forced the reopening of about 350,000 files that had been convicted in the last 20 years.
The strategy aims at only one option: to issue a final verdict with a deportation order.
Between 1998 and 2018, judges arrested 350,000 deportees through these legal means.
The outcome of the sessions was, “Immigration judges can only dismiss or stop deportation proceedings in circumstances that are explicitly identified in the regulations”, i.e. “when the DHS fails to comply with eviction charges against a defendant.”
It added that the general power of the immigration judge to take any other action in accordance with applicable laws and regulations “does not confer any additional power to suspend or dismiss deportation proceedings beyond the authorities explicitly stated in the relevant rules.”
At first it was the lawyers
Prior to the May 27 announcement by the Office of Immigration and Customs (ICE), Garland’s return order reactivated a tool known as ‘attorney discretion’, which allows attorneys at the agency to finalize a deportation case.
The practical tool was removed during the Trump administration, such as the executive shutdown this Thursday.
The judges added new rule to the June 12 order of the Immigration Court (EOIR) to guarantee “fair and timely procedures” for all immigrants.