Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:48 pm
Time: 11:48 pm
Results for immigration courts (u.s.)
2 results foundAuthor: Cavendish, Betsy Title: Reimagining the Immigration Court Assembly Line: Transformative Change for the Immigration Justice System Summary: The United States takes particular pride in our justice system. Acknowledging it’s not perfect, we rely on this system to give people a day in court, a fair shot to explain their cases before a judge who is genuinely open-minded. We expect both sides to have access to the basic facts and an opportunity to develop additional evidence; we expect that the judge will rule based on the facts and the law; and we expect the disappointed party to have the right to appeal before another impartial tribunal, where errors can be undone. We expect the government to seek justice for all and to use its prosecutorial resources wisely, to address the cases of truly public import. We value courts so highly as an alternative to cruder, more violent and far more unjust means of solving disputes that the United States advocates around the world for countries to empower independent courts to function legitimately as critical components of systems of justice. Our 2009 report, Assembly Line Injustice, found that U.S. Immigration Courts all too often, and in many, many categories, fell far short of being just, efficient places where personal dramas and dreams of belonging in the United States could be resolved. The Immigration Courts were often perceived as illegitimate, and people returned to home countries with a sense of having been dealt an injustice under the name of United States law. The losers in any case are bound to be disappointed, but it’s inexcusable to give them reason to feel that they endured a sham process carried out in the name of the law. Too often, we in the U.S. gave people reason to feel wronged. Through this update report, Appleseed and Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice, together with our pro bono partners at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, Latham & Watkins and the law schools at George Washington University and IIT Kent, are demonstrating that we are staying on the case of ensuring that our immigration justice system is just that: a system of justice. In updating our 2009 report, we note some significant improvements— and certainly a desire on the part of many government officials—to ensure a fair process, to promote prioritization of cases and modernization of recordings and systems. We also note some areas, as for instance in the patently unfair use of videoconferencing, where the government barely even nods in the direction of trying to ensure fair treatment for all. Details: Chicago: Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice, 2012. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 27, 2012 at: http://appleseednetwork.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=9yXUsswTnBI%3D&tabid=157 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://appleseednetwork.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=9yXUsswTnBI%3D&tabid=157 Shelf Number: 125409 Keywords: ImmigrantsImmigrationImmigration Courts (U.S.) |
Author: Roth, Charles Title: Order in the Court: Commonsense Solutions to Improve Efficiency and Fairness in the Immigration Court Summary: The immigration court system is in crisis. Immigration judges with insufficient resources are forced to cope with an enormous and increasing backlog. Bona fide asylum seekers and other noncitizens with viable claims wait years to have their cases heard, and the hearings often are rushed and flawed. With the recently launched "rocket dockets" expediting cases of Central American children, many hearings will be delayed further and grow even more rushed and flawed. But unlike the humanitarian crisis driving these children to seek safety in the United States or the crisis of long overdue comprehensive immigration reform, the procedural crisis of the immigration courts can be readily addressed. With basic procedural reforms, the Department of Justice's (DOJ's) Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which oversees the immigration courts, can increase the system's efficiency and provide a higher quality of adjudication at little or no additional cost to taxpayers. These reforms would reduce unnecessary hearing continuances and help administrative court judges to make more deliberate and informed rulings, thereby avoiding costly federal appeals. These recommendations draw on exhaustive research of the immigration court and other court systems and on the experience of attorneys at Heartland Alliance's National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), who practice extensively in the immigration courts. The findings complement those of other recent reports on immigration adjudications by focusing on narrow improvements to the immigration court system that the DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can implement without substantial additional resources. Details: Chicago: National Immigrant Justice Center, 2014. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2014 at: http://immigrantjustice.org/sites/immigrantjustice.org/files/Order%20in%20the%20Courts%20-%20Immigration%20Court%20Reform%20White%20Paper%20October%202014%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://immigrantjustice.org/sites/immigrantjustice.org/files/Order%20in%20the%20Courts%20-%20Immigration%20Court%20Reform%20White%20Paper%20October%202014%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 133915 Keywords: Asylum SeekersCourt ReformIllegal ImmigrantsImmigration Courts (U.S.)Immigration PolicyImmigration Reform |