Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 12:08 pm
Time: 12:08 pm
Results for criminal aliens (u.s.)
5 results foundAuthor: Rosenblum, Marc R. Title: Interior Immigration Enforcement: Programs Targeting Criminal Aliens Summary: Congress has a long-standing interest in seeing that immigration enforcement agencies identify and deport serious criminal aliens. The expeditious removal of such aliens has been a statutory priority since 1986, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its predecessor agency have operated programs targeting criminal aliens for removal since 1988. These programs have grown substantially since FY2005. Despite the interest in criminal aliens, inconsistencies in data quality, data collection, and definitions make it impossible to precisely enumerate the criminal alien population, defined in this report as all noncitizens ever convicted of a crime. CRS estimates the number of noncitizens incarcerated in federal and state prisons and local jails—a subset of all criminal aliens—at 173,000 in 2009, with state prisons and local jails accounting for somewhat more incarcerations than federal prisons. The overall proportion of noncitizens in federal and state prisons and local jails corresponds closely to the proportion of noncitizens in the total U.S. population. DHS operates four programs designed in whole or in part to target criminal aliens: the Criminal Alien Program (CAP), Secure Communities, the § 287(g) program, and the National Fugitive Operations Program (NFOP). The CAP, Secure Communities, and certain § 287(g) programs are jail enforcement programs that screen individuals for immigration-related violations as they are being booked into jail and while they are incarcerated; the NFOP and some other § 287(g) programs are task force programs that target at-large criminal aliens. This report describes how these programs work and identifies their common features and key differences among them. While consensus exists on the overarching goal to identify and remove serious criminal aliens, these programs have generated controversy, particularly Secure Communities and the § 287(g) program. On one hand, the Obama Administration and other supporters of jail enforcement programs see them as efficient and even-handed ways to identify criminal aliens. The Administration has taken steps to strengthen and expand Secure Communities and plans to implement the program in every law enforcement jurisdiction in the country by 2013. On the other hand, some lawmakers and advocacy groups have raised concerns that Secure Communities and the § 287(g) program have not been narrowly targeted at serious criminal offenders and that the programs may have adverse impacts on police-community relations, may result in racial profiling, and may result in the detention of people who have not been convicted of criminal offenses and may not be subject to removal. Disagreements about the merits of jail enforcement programs overlap with a separate set of questions about the role of states and localities in immigration enforcement. These jurisdictional questions have focused in particular on Secure Communities, in part because the Administration initially appeared to present it as a discretionary program but now takes the position that states and localities may not “opt out” of Secure Communities. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Services, 2011. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: R42057: Accessed November 19, 2011 at: http://mexicoinstitute.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/csr-interior-enforcement.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://mexicoinstitute.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/csr-interior-enforcement.pdf Shelf Number: 123402 Keywords: Criminal Aliens (U.S.)DeportationIllegal AliensIllegal ImmigrationsImmigrants |
Author: Title: Removals Involving Illegal Alien Parents of United States Citizen Children Summary: The Committee on Appropriations for the House of Representatives directed the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General, through H. Rep. 110-181, to report on detentions and removals involving U.S. citizen children and their parents among Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s detention center population over the past 10 years. The requested data included: (1) the total number of aliens removed from the United States; (2) the number of instances in which one or both parents of a U.S. citizen child were removed; (3) the reason for the parents’ removal; (4) the length of time the parents lived in the United States before removal; (5) whether the U.S. citizen children remained in the United States after the parents’ removal; and (6) the number of days a U.S. citizen child was held in detention. The United States conducted 2,199,138 alien removals between FYs 1998 and 2007. Existing data indicate that these removals involved 108,434 alien parents of U.S. citizen children. Alien parents were removed because of immigration violations, such as being present without authorization or committing criminal violations that affect immigration status. Data limitations decrease the reliability of these results, including the absence of a requirement for staff to collect data that establish which aliens are the parents of U.S. citizen children. We were unable to compile all the requested data because Immigration and Customs Enforcement does not collect the following specific information: (1) the number of instances in which both parents of a particular child were removed; (2) the length of time a parent lived in the United States before removal; and (3) whether the U.S. citizen children remained in the United States after the parents’ removal. Immigration and Customs Enforcement reported detaining no U.S. citizen children. We are recommending that Immigration and Customs Enforcement analyze and report on the feasibility of establishing procedures to document the number of removed alien parents and the age of aliens’ children to indicate whether they are minors or adults. Details: Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, 2009. 23p. Source: OIG-09-15: Internet Resource: Accessed February 11, 2012 at http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/library/P3156.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/library/P3156.pdf Shelf Number: 124080 Keywords: Criminal Aliens (U.S.)DeportationIllegal AliensIllegal ImmigrationsImmigrantsParents |
Author: Title: Detention and Removal of Illegal Aliens: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Summary: This report presents the results of our review of DHS’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) program for detaining and removing illegal aliens1 apprehended in the United States and at ports of entry. The program is administered through ICE’s Office of Detention and Removal (DRO). The objective of our review was to determine the extent to which DRO is performing its mission to remove all illegal aliens who are removable, including those that pose a potential national security or public safety threat to the U.S. Currently, DRO is unable to ensure the departure from the U.S. of all removable aliens. Of the 774,112 illegal aliens apprehended during the past three years, 280,987 (36%) were released largely due to a lack of personnel, bed space, and funding needed to detain illegal aliens while their immigration status is being adjudicated. This presents significant risks due to the inability of Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) and ICE to verify the identity, country-oforigin, and terrorist or criminal affiliation of many of the aliens being released. Further, the declining personnel and bed space level is occurring when the number of illegal aliens apprehended is increasing. For example, the number of illegal aliens apprehended increased from 231,077 in FY 2002 to 275,680 in FY 2004, a 19 percent increase. However, during the same period, authorized personnel and funded bed space levels declined by 3 percent and 6 percent, respectively. These shortfalls encourage illegal immigration by increasing the likelihood that apprehended aliens will be released while their immigration status is adjudicated. Further, historical trends indicate that 62 percent of the aliens released will eventually be issued final orders of removal by the U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) and later fail to surrender for removal or abscond. Although DRO has received additional funding to enhance its Fugitive Operations Program, it is unlikely that many of the released aliens will ever be removed. As of December 30, 2005, there were more than 544,000 released aliens with final orders of removal who have absconded. Declining bed space and personnel levels are also making it difficult for ICE/DRO to detain and remove illegal aliens that are from countries other than Mexico (OTM) including aliens from countries whose governments support state sponsored terrorism (SST) or who promote, produce, or protect terrorist organizations and their members (SIC). Of the 605,210 OTMs apprehended between FY 2001 and the first six months of FY 2005, 309,733 were released of which 45,008 (15%) purportedly originated from SST and SIC countries. DRO estimates that in FY 2007 there will be 605,000 foreign-born individuals admitted to state correctional facilities and local jails during the year for committing crimes in the U.S. Of this number, DRO estimates half (302,500) will be removable aliens. Most of these incarcerated aliens are being released into the U.S. at the conclusion of their respective sentences because DRO does not have the resources to identify, detain, and remove these aliens under its Criminal Alien Program (CAP). It is estimated that DRO would need an additional 34,653 detention beds, at an estimated cost of $1.1 billion, to detain and remove all SST, SIC, and CAP aliens. Additionally, DRO’s ability to detain and remove illegal aliens with final orders of removal is impacted by (1) the propensity of illegal aliens to disobey orders to appear in immigration court; (2) the penchant of released illegal aliens with final orders to abscond; (3) the practice of some countries to block or inhibit the repatriation of its citizens; and (4) two recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions which mandate the release of criminal and other high-risk aliens 180 days after the issuance of the final removal order except in “Special Circumstances.” Collectively, the bed space, personnel and funding shortages coupled with the other factors, has created an unofficial “mini-amnesty” program for criminal and other high-risk aliens. DRO’s goal is to develop the capacity to remove all removable aliens, and it has developed a strategic plan covering 2003-2012 entitled “Endgame,” to accomplish that goal. However, the plan identifies several significant challenges beyond its control, including the need for sufficient resources, political will, and the cooperation of foreign governments. Current resources, including those included in the FY 2006 Appropriations Act and the Administration’s FY 2007 budget request, are not sufficient to detain all high-risk aliens, including those from SST and SIC countries. We are recommending that the Assistant Secretary (ICE) develop a plan to provide ICE with the capacity to: (1) detain and remove high-risk aliens; (2) intensify its efforts to develop alternatives to detention; and (3) resolve with the State Department issues that are preventing or impeding the repatriation of illegal OTMs. Also, we are recommending that DRO expedite its efforts to implement a data management system that is capable of meeting its expanding data collection and analysis needs relating to the detention and removal of illegal aliens. Such a system would significantly enhance DRO’s ability to support future budget requests, identify emerging trends, and assess its overall mission performance. Details: Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, 2006. 52p. Source: Office of Audits Report OIG-06-33: Internet Resource: Accessed February 11, 2012 at http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/OIG_06-33_Apr06.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/OIG_06-33_Apr06.pdf Shelf Number: 124081 Keywords: Criminal Aliens (U.S.)DeportationDetentionIllegal AliensIllegal ImmigrationsImmigrants |
Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Secure Communities: Criminal Alien Removals Increased, but Technology Planning Improvements Needed Summary: Data from the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) indicate that the percentage of its removals attributable to Secure Communities increased from about 4 percent in fiscal year 2009 to about 20 percent in fiscal year 2011. Of about 183,000 aliens removed under the program from October 2008 through March 2012, about 74 percent had a criminal conviction. ICE did not have state or local arrest charges for about 56 percent of alien Secure Communities removals from October 2010 (when ICE began collecting arrest charges) through March 2012, so we were unable to determine the most frequent arrest charges under the program. For the 44 percent of aliens removed on whom ICE collected arrest charge data, traffic offenses, including driving under the influence of alcohol, were the most frequent arrest charges. ICE is taking steps to improve the collection of arrest charge data, but it is too early to assess the effectiveness of its efforts. ICE has not consistently followed best practices in acquiring technology to help determine the immigration status of aliens identified by Secure Communities. ICE awarded contracts to modernize its technology without fully defining requirements or developing an integrated master schedule—two best practices for managing capital programs. As a result, ICE encountered delays, cost increases, and products that did not meet ICE’s needs. For example, ICE spent $14.3 million for one contract to develop services that ICE found to be unusable. Establishing well-defined requirements and developing an integrated schedule for completing technology modernization could better position ICE to prevent delays and cost increases. Further, ICE plans to develop a workforce plan after the systems are deployed. Developing a workforce plan prior to full system deployment, consistent with internal controls, could better position ICE to effectively use staff when it deploys the modernized technology. DHS’s Office of Civil Rights and ICE identified four safeguards to help protect aliens’ civil rights under Secure Communities, including providing detainees with a revised detainer form with telephone numbers to call when they feel their civil rights have been violated. Officials are also developing briefing materials on how to protect aliens’ civil rights, statistically analyzing arrest and other information to identify potential civil rights abuses, and using an existing DHS complaint process for addressing Secure Communities concerns. Initiated in 2008, Secure Communities is an ICE program designed to identify potentially removable aliens, particularly those with criminal convictions, in state and local law enforcement custody. Fingerprints checked against a Federal Bureau of Investigation criminal database are checked against DHS’s immigration database to help determine whether an arrested individual is removable. GAO was asked to review Secure Communities operations. This report addresses (1) enforcement trends under Secure Communities, (2) ICE’s adherence to best practices in acquiring Secure Communities–related technology, and (3) ICE safeguards to help protect against potential civil rights abuses under Secure Communities. GAO analyzed ICE data on removals from October 2008 through March 2012, and arrest charges from October 2010 through March 2012; reviewed program guidance, policies, and reports; and interviewed ICE’s Law Enforcement Support Center and agency officials, local law enforcement and community groups in four locations selected for geographic diversity, among other factors. These perspectives are not generalizable, but provided insights into Secure Communities operations. GAO recommends that ICE develop well-defined requirements and an integrated master schedule that accounts for all activities for its technology contracts, and a plan for workforce changes in preparation for full technology deployment. DHS concurred with the recommendations. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2012. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-12-708: Accessed August 3, 2012 at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/592415.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/592415.pdf Shelf Number: 125850 Keywords: Criminal Aliens (U.S.)ImmigrantsImmigrants and CrimeImmigrationImmigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) |
Author: Homeland Security Advisory Council. U.S. Department of Homeland Security Title: Task Force on Secure Communities: Findings and Recommendations Summary: The Task Force on Secure Communities is a subcommittee of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) and was created in June 2011 at the request of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. HSAC, which is comprised of leaders from state and local government, first responder agencies, the private sector, and academia, provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary on matters related to homeland security. The Task Force was asked to consider how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) may improve the Secure Communities Program, including how to address some of the concerns about the program that “relate to [its] impact on community policing and the possibility of racial profiling,” and “how to best focus on individuals who pose a true public safety or national security threat.” In addition, the Task Force was specifically charged with making recommendations “on how ICE can adjust the Secure Communities program to mitigate potential impacts on community policing practices, including whether and how to implement policy regarding the removals of individuals charged with, but not convicted of, minor traffic offenses who have no other criminal history.” Under Secure Communities, fingerprints of persons arrested by state and local law enforcement agencies, which those agencies routinely submit to the FBI for criminal justice database checks, are automatically shared with DHS. ICE then checks the local arrestee information against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) immigration databases. If ICE determines that it has an interest in an individual arrestee, the agency then determines what enforcement action to take. In most cases, the people determined to be of interest to ICE are subject to ICE enforcement action for reasons independent of the arrest or conviction. That is, the check of databases may indicate, for example, that the person is removable because he or she entered the country without inspection or overstayed a visa. Specific findings and recommendations are offered within. There is a strong consensus view, within the Task Force and in communities across the nation, that it is appropriate for ICE to continue to take enforcement action against serious criminal offenders who are subject to deportation. But because there are circumstances in which Secure Communities results in the removal of persons who are minor offenders or who have never been convicted of a crime, and because statements by ICE have left much confusion about the full reach of its enforcement priorities, many jurisdictions are concerned about the impact of Secure Communities on community policing. We recommend specific steps on which there is Task Force consensus that would help build trust in the program. Many Task Force members would go further, including recommending suspension of the program until major changes are made, or even recommending termination of what they believe is a fundamentally flawed program. Other members believe that reforms are necessary but the program nonetheless must continue to function. Those differences of view are reflected in the discussion below. ICE must recognize that it does not work in a vacuum and that its enforcement actions impact other agencies and the relationships with their communities in what some may conclude is a negative way. The following pages contain recommendations for ICE to revise the program while working with state and local police, elected officials, and other stakeholders, taking their concerns seriously and working in partnership to find appropriate solutions. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2011. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 5, 2012 at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hsac-task-force-on-secure-communities-findings-and-recommendations-report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hsac-task-force-on-secure-communities-findings-and-recommendations-report.pdf Shelf Number: 126264 Keywords: Background ChecksCommunity PolicingCriminal Aliens (U.S.)Customs EnforcementDeportation |