Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:10 pm
Time: 11:10 pm
Results for operation streamline
6 results foundAuthor: Lydgate, Joanna Title: Assembly-Line Justice: A Review of Operation Streamline Summary: The current administration is committed to combating the drug and weapon trafficking and human smuggling at the root of violence along the U.S.-Mexico border. But a Bush-era immigration enforcement program called Operation Streamline threatens to undermine that effort. Operation Streamline requires the federal criminal prosecution and imprisonment of all unlawful border crossers. The program, which mainly targets migrant workers with no criminal history, has caused skyrocketing caseloads in many federal district courts along the border. This Warren Institute study demonstrates that Operation Streamline diverts crucial law enforcement resources away from fighting violent crime along the border, fails to effectively reduce undocumented immigration, and violates the U.S. Constitution. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) began implementing Operation Streamline along the U.S.-Mexico border in 2005. The program has fundamentally transformed DHS’s border enforcement practices. Before Operation Streamline began, DHS Border Patrol agents voluntarily returned first-time border crossers to their home countries or detained them and formally removed them from the United States through the civil immigration system. The U.S. Attorney’s Office reserved criminal prosecution for migrants with criminal records and for those who made repeated attempts to cross the border. Operation Streamline removed that prosecutorial discretion, requiring the criminal prosecution of all undocumented border crossers, regardless of their history. Operation Streamline has generated unprecedented caseloads in eight of the eleven federal district courts along the border, straining the resources of judges, U.S. attorneys, defense attorneys, U.S. Marshals, and court personnel. The program’s voluminous prosecutions have forced many courts to cut procedural corners. Magistrate judges conduct en masse hearings, during which as many as 80 defendants plead guilty at a time, depriving migrants of due process. Indeed, in December 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that Operation Streamline’s en masse plea hearings in Tucson, Arizona violate federal law. By focusing court and law enforcement resources on the prosecution of first-time entrants, Operation Streamline also diverts attention away from fighting drug smuggling, human trafficking, and other crimes that create border violence. To examine Operation Streamline’s effects, the Warren Institute observed Operation Streamline court proceedings and conducted interviews with judges, U.S. attorneys, defense attorneys, Border Patrol representatives, and immigration lawyers in four border cities in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. This report outlines the Warren Institute’s findings. It concludes that Operation Streamline is not an effective means of improving border security or reducing undocumented immigration. Furthermore, Operation Streamline has unacceptable consequences for the agencies tasked with implementing the program, for the migrants it targets, and for the rule of law in this country. The administration should therefore eliminate Operation Streamline and restore U.S. attorneys’ discretion to prosecute serious crimes along the border. If the administration seeks to punish first-time border crossers, it need look no further than the civil system. Details: Berkeley, CA: Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Race, Ethnicity & Diversity, University of California, Berkeley Law School, 2010. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Brief: Accessed October 1, 2012 at: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Operation_Streamline_Policy_Brief.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Operation_Streamline_Policy_Brief.pdf Shelf Number: 126538 Keywords: Border SecurityHomeland SecurityIllegal AliensIllegal Immigrants (U.S.)Immigrant DetentionImmigration PolicyOperation StreamlinePrison Prisons |
Author: Martinez, Daniel E. Title: Bordering on Criminal: The Routine Abuse of Migrants in the Removal System. Part II: Possessions Taken and Not Returned Summary: This report focuses on the issue of repatriated migrants' belongings being taken and not returned by U.S. authorities. Overall, we find that the taking of belongings and the failure to return them is not a random, sporadic occurrence, but a systematic practice. One indication of this is that just over one-third of deportees report having belongings taken and not returned. Perhaps one of the most alarming findings is that, among deportees who were carrying Mexican identification cards, 1 out of every 4 had their card taken and not returned. The taking of possessions, particularly identity documents, can have serious consequences and is an expression of how dysfunctional the deportation system is. Our study finds that migrants processed through Operation Streamline, or held in detention for a week or longer, are most likely to have their possessions taken and not returned. Details: Washington, DC: Immigration Policy Center, American Immigration Council, 2013. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Special Report: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/ipc/Border%20-%20Possessions%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/ipc/Border%20-%20Possessions%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 132341 Keywords: Immigrant Detention Immigrants Immigration Immigration EnforcementOperation StreamlineUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Martinez, Daniel E. Title: Bordering on Criminal: The Routine Abuse of Migrants in the Removal System. Part I: Migrant Mistreatment While in U.S. Custody Summary: This is the first in a series of three reports we will be releasing that highlight findings from the second wave of the Migrant Border Crossing Study (MBCS). Wave II of the MBCS, currently housed in the Center for Latin American Studies at the University of Arizona and the Department of Sociology at George Washington University, is a binational, multiinstitution study of 1,110 randomly selected, recently repatriated migrants1 surveyed in six Mexican cities between 2009 and 2012. This report focuses on the mistreatment of unauthorized migrants while in U.S. custody. Overall, we find that the physical and verbal mistreatment of migrants is not a random, sporadic occurrence but, rather, a systematic practice. One indication of this is that 11% of deportees report some form of physical abuse and 23% report verbal mistreatment while in U.S. custody - a finding that is supported by other academic studies and reports from nongovernmental organizations. Another highly disturbing finding is that migrants often note they are the targets for nationalistic and racist remarks - something that in no way is integral to U.S. officials' ability to function in an effective capacity on a day-to-day basis. We find that, when they occur, physical and verbal abuses are usually perpetrated during the apprehension process. When taken in the context of prior studies, it appears that the abuse of migrants while in U.S. custody is a systemic problem and points to an organizational subculture stemming from a lack of transparency and accountability in U.S. Customs and Border Protection. These patterns of abuse have brought scrutiny to the Border Patrol's use-of-force policies and created tension in border communities. Future research should examine the longer-term social and psychological consequences of these types of abuse for migrants and their loved ones. Details: Washington, DC: Immigration Policy Center, American Immigration Council, 2013. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2015 at: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/ipc/Border%20-%20Abuses%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/ipc/Border%20-%20Abuses%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 132197 Keywords: Immigrant Detention Immigrants Immigration Immigration Enforcement Operation StreamlineUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Title: Streamline: Measuring Its Effect on Illegal Border Crossing Summary: Streamline is an initiative to criminally prosecute individuals who illegally enter the United States through defined geographic regions along the Southwest border. We reviewed: (1) whether Border Patrol measures Streamline' effect on illegal re-entry; (2) whether the cost of Streamline can be determined; and (3) how Streamline affects U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Office of Enforcement and Removal Operations' (ER)) resources. Details: Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, 2015. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: OIG-15-95: Accessed January 11, 2016 at: https://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/2015/OIG_15-95_May15.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/2015/OIG_15-95_May15.pdf Shelf Number: 137459 Keywords: Border PatrolBorder SecurityIllegal ImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementOperation Streamline |
Author: Greene, Judith Title: Indefensible: A Decade of Mass Incarceration of Migrants Prosecuted for Crossing the Border Summary: December 2015 marked the 10th anniversary of the launch of a program to target for criminal prosecution migrants who had crossed the border without authorization. It was named "Operation Streamline." It is known for the mass hearings (often lasting less than two hours) in which up to 80 migrants are arraigned, found guilty, convicted and sentenced for 8 USC 1325 (improper entry, a misdemeanor) simultaneously. The policy has long been decried by immigrant rights advocates. However, the mass hearings of Operation Streamline, as shocking as they are, are only the tip of the iceberg. Lesser known by the general public, media, and even some immigrant rights and criminal justice reform advocates, is the widespread expansion of 8 USC 1326 (re-entry, a felony) prosecutions over the past decade that came with the Streamline program. Though border officials in some sectors say that Operation Streamline has ended, the numbers of migrants prosecuted in federal courts is still massive in sheer numbers. The criminal prosecution of migrants crossing our southern border has had profound impacts on the federal courts and federal prisons over the last decade. In 2015, improper entry and re-entry prosecutions accounted for almost half of all federal prosecutions (49 percent). Improper entry is punishable by up to 180 days in federal jail while improper re-entry is punishable by up to two years. And if the migrant has a serious prior criminal history, many more years may be added to the sentence. Almost a quarter of those in the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) prison population are non-citizens (23 percent). Using the data available, we conservatively estimate the incarceration costs for those convicted of improper entry and re-entry at more than $7 billion since the start of Operation Streamline in 2005. This book provides an oral history of the evolution of Operation Streamline over 10 years and its legacy today. We document the beginnings Operation Streamline and the evolution of targeted migrant prosecutions. We explore how the program took hold across border districts in distinct ways. We examine how an already politicized issue collided with media hype and, "moral panic" over immigration levels. We describe how ambitious and powerful individuals and agencies within the newly formed Department of Homeland Security launched this huge, targeted prosecution program. We interviewed more than three dozen people who work inside the federal criminal justice system, or who have been impacted by it, for this book. We have attempted to amplify their voices by using their own words as often as possible. In looking back at 10 years of mass prosecution of migrants, we have an opportunity to examine how and why the program emerged. We can also examine the harm it has caused against the scant evidence that it has achieved the stated goal of deterring migration at the southern border. There exists in the story of migrant prosecutions an intersection where those working for immigrant rights and for criminal justice reform can join hands to work together. Finally, we can find inspiration in the ample opportunities for resistance and in this book we highlight the efforts of those who are organizing to bring an end to prosecution of migrants at the border. Details: Austin, TX: Grassroots Leadership; New York: Justice Strategies, 2016. 181p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2016 at: http://grassrootsleadership.org/sites/default/files/reports/indefensible_book_web.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://grassrootsleadership.org/sites/default/files/reports/indefensible_book_web.pdf Shelf Number: 139655 Keywords: Border SecurityImmigrant DetentionImmigrantsOperation StreamlineUndocumented Migrants |
Author: Finch, Jessie K. Title: Legal Borders, Racial/Ethnic Boundaries: Operation Streamline and Identity Processes on the US-Mexico Border Summary: How do individuals navigate situations in which their work-role identity is put in competition with social identities of race/ethnicity, nationality, or citizenship/generational status? This research uses a controversial criminal court procedure (Operation Streamline) as an optimal setting to understand the strategies employed by lawyers and judges who manage such delicate identity processes. I examine how legal professionals assign salience to their various identities while developing a perspective of competing identity management that builds on and further integrates prior sociological research on identity. In particular, Latino/a judges and lawyers who participate in Operation Streamline (OSL) take on a specific work-related role identity that entails assisting in the conviction and sentencing of border-crossers with whom they share one social identity - race/ethnicity - but do not share another social identity - citizenship. I systematically assess identity management strategies used by lawyers and judges to manage these multiple competing identities while seeking to comprehend under what circumstances these identities affect legal professionals' job-related interactions. In this dissertation, I demonstrate that Latino/a lawyers and judges involved with OSL manage their potentially competing social and role identities differently than non-Latino/as whose social identities do not compete with their role identities, demonstrating variation between racial/ethnic social identities. I also find that some Latino/a lawyers and judges (those with higher racial/ethnic social identity salience) involved with OSL manage their potentially competing social and role identities differently than other Latino/a lawyers and judges (those with higher racial/ethnic social identity salience), demonstrating variation within racial/ethnic social identity based on the social identity of citizenship/generational status. Finally, I demonstrate that situationality is a factor in identity management because a shared social identity with defendants seems to be useful in the daily work of Latino/a lawyers and judges, but often detrimental in how they are perceived by outsiders such as activists and the media. From this case, we can take the findings and begin to create an outline for a new theory of competing identity management, integrating prior literatures on social and role identities. I have been able to elaborate mechanisms of some identity management processes while also developing grounded hypotheses on which to base future research. My research also contributes to improving how the criminal justice system deals with sensitive racial/ethnic issues surrounding immigration crimes and en masse proceedings such as OSL. Because proposed "comprehensive immigration reform" includes expanding programs like OSL, my research to understand the broader effects of the program on legal professionals is especially important not only to social scientists but to society at large. The fact that there is a difference in identity management strategies for Latino/a and non-Latino/a respondents helps demonstrate there is in fact an underlying racial tension present in Operation Streamline. Details: Tucson: University of Arizona, 2015. 222p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed July 20, 2016 at: http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/handle/10150/578902 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/handle/10150/578902 Shelf Number: 139720 Keywords: Border ControlBorder SecurityIllegal ImmigrationImmigrantsImmigrationOperation Streamline |