The Public Defenders Coalition for Immigrant Justice

A TEN-POINT IMMIGRATION PROGRAM FOR THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION

As Public Defenders who represent non-citizens in criminal and/or immigration proceedings, we call on the Biden Administration to take immediate and bold action on behalf of our immigrant community members. This year has been a turning point in our nation’s call for racial justice, finally acknowledging what communities of color have long since known – that the criminal and immigration deportation pipeline targets Black and brown people. We are on the forefront of witnessing the devastation to our clients, families and communities from the unjust criminalization of immigrants through state and federal criminal laws. We offer these recommendations for actions the Biden Administration can take that will have real impact in addressing the injustices of the criminal legal system and its pipeline to deportation.

The Trump Administration has laid bare the cruelty of the immigration enforcement regime and exacerbated its inherent injustices. It has upended the asylum system; worked to deprive hundreds of thousands of lawful status; rendered the immigration courts devoid of independence and due process; sought to construct impenetrable borders, both physical and legal; and blatantly capitalized on the racist mechanisms in the system at every turn. This has included using any contact with the criminal legal system as a pretext for expelling hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the United States.

Aspiring for a return to Obama-era policies is not enough. We call on the Biden Administration to take bold steps that are necessary to heal our communities from the devastating impact of deportations. This must include correcting the punishing 1996 immigration laws that stripped immigration courts of discretion and reinforced the harms of the criminal legal system.

Aggressive interior immigration enforcement at this level is a recent phenomenon. So too is the entanglement of the criminal and immigration systems and the deprivation of rights for those with prior criminal convictions. These must not be seen as inevitable.

The Biden Administration has an opportunity to take a fresh approach to these important issues. The Public Defenders Offices listed below join with other organizations, advocates, and leaders, to call for the following necessary reforms to create a more just and humane immigration system.

1. Day-One: Establish a Moratorium On Deportations for One Year

The Trump Administration has wreaked havoc on our immigration legal system. It has stacked the immigration courts with partisan judges, changed regulations beyond what Congress contemplated, and authorized and re-written immigration law. It will take time to ensure basic fairness in our laws, and to undo these devastatingly strict legal changes. Families should not be torn apart while the Biden Administration works to pick up the pieces from these scorched earth policies.[1] The Biden Administration must immediately make good on its commitment to a moratorium and expand it beyond 100 days.[2]

The Biden Administration should:

· Use Executive Action on Day One to declare a one-year moratorium on deportations, without criminal carveouts.

· Release on orders of supervision those detained – particularly those with removal orders – so that a moratorium does not equate to prolonged or indefinite detention.

· Cease immigration enforcement during the period of the moratorium.

· Suspend any routine check-ins with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

· Avoid the initiation of removal proceedings and the referral for prosecution of any charges of illegal entry or re-entry for the duration of the moratorium.

· Stay all immigration proceedings absent the request of noncitizens in removal proceedings or for custody redetermination proceedings for anyone detained.

2. Reverse Trump-Era Anti-Immigrant Policies

The Biden Administration should swiftly reverse the devastating xenophobic policies of the prior Administration—with Congress where possible and through executive action where necessary.

To reverse Trump-Era anti-immigrant policies, the Biden Administration should:

· Strengthen and push Congress to codify the Deferred Acton for Childhood Arrivals program. Eliminate criminal bars to eligibility.

· Reinstate the Deferred Action for Parental Arrivals program, without criminal bars to eligibility.

· Continue protections for those with Temporary Protected Status, or provide Deferred Enforced Departure for those with long-term TPS which the Trump Administration sought to terminate.

· Terminate the anti-immigrant travel bans, the Trump Executive Orders, and the DHS Memoranda concerning interior enforcement and border security.[3]

· Reverse bars to entry for asylum-seekers, specifically the “Remain in Mexico” policies and Asylum Cooperative Agreements with Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.

· Rescind Trump-Era regulations which uniformly serve to undermine access to immigration relief, including public charge regulations, the third country bar, and asylum limitations which impose undue restrictions on victims of non-state actors, including gangs and domestic abusers. Roll back regulation imposing bars to asylum based on even minor involvement with the criminal legal system.

3. End Immigration Detention

Over the past 25 years, the number of noncitizens detained while awaiting a decision in their removal proceedings has swelled more than sevenfold. This is an extraordinary deviation from the prior practice of treating civil detention of noncitizens as an exception rather than the rule. For-profit incarceration has become a multi-billion-dollar industry that incentivizes human suffering for a profit motive—and is responsible for more than 70% of immigration detention.

The current immigration detention practices are as unnecessary as they are unjust. Independent analyses show that the overwhelming majority of non-detained individuals in removal proceedings attend their court hearings—particularly when represented by counsel, and regardless of their criminal record.[4] A government evaluation of the conditional electronic supervision program which oversees some released immigrants found a 99% attendance rate at all hearings.[5] Yet detention serves to diminish the willingness of individuals to fight their removal cases: isolated in far-removed detention centers, without access to lawyers or the most basic resources, noncitizens abandon their claims and accept removal. This occurs often even for individuals with years or decades in the United States, deep family ties, and viable claims for relief.

Immigration detention also interferes with noncitizens’ ability to seek rehabilitation and make amends for prior criminal conduct. A criminal judge may determine that justice is best served by sentencing an individual to a non-custodial sentence. However, noncitizens are frequently taken into ICE custody before they are able to complete probation, substance abuse treatment, community service, or other restorative justice programming. By taking noncitizens into custody, ICE prevents noncitizens from being able to prove themselves and take steps that benefit society overall. Instead, noncitizens are locked up in facilities where they are warehoused rather than provided access to their court-ordered rehabilitation or restorative programming.

Detention is civil, not criminal—and the criminal justice system is the appropriate place where public safety concerns should be addressed. Where someone has been released from criminal custody (on bail or after completion of a sentence), the criminal justice system has already decided that person is not a public safety risk; civil immigration officials should not override that judgement. At most, federal immigration authorities should only be able to detain individuals if the government can prove by clear and convincing evidence that a person is a current and imminent threat to public safety.

Litigation challenging detention during the COVID pandemic has contributed to the decrease of those detained: fewer than 17,000 are now in immigration detention, down from 52,000 in late 2019. This shows that dramatically reduced immigration detention is possible; there should be no justification for any detention above this level.

The Biden Administration should:

· Commit immediately to not increase detention beyond the current levels, and then work to decrease those numbers.

· End all contracts with for-profit prisons and close them down for good, as President Obama started to do at the end of his second term and as President-Elect Biden has already committed to doing.[6]

· Invest in effective alternatives to detention, especially community-based models of non-profit case management.[7]

· Use executive action to release individuals from detention, including through deferred action and parole.

· Provide directives to ICE trial counsel to request and/or not oppose imposition of only minimal release bonds in removal cases.

· Clarify that in the event of any detention, there is a presumption of release and it is the government’s burden to prove that a detained individual is a danger to the community in bond proceedings, rather than the other way around.

· Work with Congress to advance legislation to permanently end the concept of “mandatory detention” and minimize immigration detention budgets.

· To the extent immigration detention continues, meaningfully monitor all detention facilities, including county jails housing ICE detainees, to ensure that noncitizens’ rights are protected.[8]

4. Establish a Robust and Federally Funded Universal Representation Program

There is an ongoing human rights crisis in our immigration courts—immigrants unable to afford a lawyer must represent themselves in deportation cases. The situation is particularly dire for detained individuals who have faster proceedings, fewer resources, and far lower levels of current legal representation.[9] Other immigrants fall victim to notaries The expansion of the right to counsel enshrined in criminal proceedings by Gideon v. Wainwright into the immigration context is long overdue. Tens of thousands of community members are ordered deported in court without having access to counsel despite often meritorious defenses to deportation. Research reflects that immigrants represented by counsel fare better at every stage of the court process.[10] Detained immigrants with counsel are successful seeking relief ten-and-a-half times more than their pro se counterparts.[11] Ninety-five percent of successful cases were represented.[12] Unrepresented immigrants may also be subject to prolonged detention even though, with the assistance of counsel, they would be released to their families and communities, and have a far greater chance of success at fighting their removal.

Federal funding for immigration legal services is inadequate. State and local governments, along with non-profit foundations, have tried to fill this gap. However, existing funding is lacking.

It is the role of the federal government to ensure fairness in the legal processes it has created. The most basic element of fairness is to ensure a human being facing the drastic punishment of deportation has access to a lawyer. The federal government should fully fund access to counsel in removal proceedings, particularly for those who are detained.

Further, in criminal hearings, noncitizens often lack the basic information about the immigration consequences of proposed criminal charges to make informed decisions. As a result, pleas – even to misdemeanor charges – can have devastating immigration consequences for both undocumented immigrants and green card holders, regardless of their long-term presence in the United States. The impact of resulting deportations is devastating.

The Biden Administration should:

· Sharply increase federal funding for public removal defense, with the goal to ensure all individuals in removal proceedings have access to competent counsel, prioritizing those who are detained.

· Provide federal funding to ensure state and federal criminal defense attorneys have the resources to provide noncitizens with affirmative, accurate advice regarding the immigration consequences of accepting a plea offer or proceeding to trial, as required by the Supreme Court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky.

5. Restructure Immigration Courts and Restore Due Process in Proceedings

Immigration courts have become deportation conveyor belts, where the role of the courts is increasingly to rubber stamp deportations. Due process in immigration courts is severely lacking. Immigrants are not entitled to discovery. ICE uses unreliable hearsay evidence to prove its charges. People who are detained don’t have a right to personally appear for their hearing; instead they appear over video for their evidentiary trial, which inhibits communication and dehumanizes the process. Judges have been given case completion quotas, and are incentivized to abbreviate proceedings, not hear from witnesses, and deny continuances for case preparation. Many immigration judges deny cases more than 90% of the time.[13] Children and people with severe mental health challenges or other disabilities often are forced to defend themselves without counsel or meaningful accommodations. The courts are attempting to stop most in-person hearings, and issue deportation orders without ever having an in-person or even video hearing. This must end.

The National Association of Immigration Judges, American Bar Association, and countless other advocates have called for the restructuring of the immigration courts, including moving them from under the Department of Justice—which is also responsible for enforcing deportations. In a letter, NAIJ, the ABA, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and the Federal Bar Association wrote: “Our current immigration court system cannot meet the standards which justice demands” and suffers from an “inherent conflict of interest.”[14] Reforms are urgent.

The Biden Administration should:

· Vacate Trump Era decisions of the Attorney General which overturned long standing precedent and created improper barriers to asylum and other forms of immigration relief.

· Reinstitute the discretion of both immigration judges and DHS prosecutors to allow for administrative closure and termination of proceedings where appropriate without exclusions based on criminal carveouts, and restore discretion to permit continuances to find an attorney or case preparation.

· Remove abusive and blatantly anti-immigrant judges; balance the bench with new judicial hires from both defensive and prosecutorial backgrounds; and require relevant immigration experience—including members of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

· Immediately work to restore and enhance fundamental due process norms.

· Conduct an overhaul of the Executive Office for Immigration Review eliminating policies which undermine due process.

· Work aggressively with Congress to pass legislation to create Article I immigration courts, moving the immigration courts from the Department of Justice, to increase their independence.

6. End the Jail to Deportation Pipeline

Immigration enforcement practices have increasingly entangled the immigration and local criminal justice systems, creating a deportation pipeline that has facilitated skyrocketing levels of detention and deportation. Any interaction with the criminal justice system exponentially increases a noncitizen’s risk of severe immigration consequences—through the sharing of information or direct transfers from jails to ICE. Local law enforcement should have no role whatsoever in enforcing immigration laws, which is a federal responsibility.

Studies have consistently shown no correlation between deportation rates and public safety. Instead studies have shown that increased collaboration between local law enforcement and ICE has a detrimental effect on public safety and increases racial profiling and discriminatory policing. Sanctuary policies that maintain the separation of local law enforcement and immigration enforcement function as a community safety tool, and help build trust between communities and law enforcement.

The Biden Administration should:

· End collaboration between immigration enforcement and local law enforcement by ending Secure Communities, the Priority Enforcement Program, 287(g) agreements, the Criminal Alien Program, and other information-sharing programs and programs which deputize local law enforcement to perform immigration enforcement duties.

· Prohibit practice of obtaining waiver of right to a hearing before an immigration judge in removal proceedings for individuals detained in state or federal custody.

· End the practice of ruses in immigration enforcement actions, including the deceptive practice of ICE agents identifying themselves as police.

7. End the War on Drugs Against Immigrants

As a nation, we have started to move away from a punishment paradigm in the criminal legal system, which has resulted in untold horrors against communities of color, and towards a 21^st century conceptualization of redemption and rehabilitation. State and local governments have taken important steps in criminal justice reform, such as decriminalizing controlled substances such as marijuana; creating alternative disposition courts, like mental health and drug courts; and, expanding rehabilitative efforts for youth. Legislation like the BREATHE Act would continue that trend.

That same reckoning is overdue in the federal immigration system. While the country is engaging in thoughtful dialogue around addiction, and the need to reverse the consequences of a failed “war on drugs,” immigration laws remain punishingly strict. A single misdemeanor drug offense has permanent consequences—and can trigger automatic deportation with no eligibility to return. We must change these policies that unduly punish immigrant families for the societal problem of addiction that has touched us all.

The Biden Administration should:

· Aggressively support legislation to reform rules establishing deportability based on drug convictions, and to permit judges and adjudicators to waive offenses based on counterbalancing equities.

· Enact sweeping prosecutorial discretion policies to ensure families are not separated as a result of addiction-related convictions.

· Give full faith and credit to state rehabilitative expungements and other dispositions intended to nullify or vacate convictions. This can be done through a combination of, e.g., legislative reform, prosecutorial discretion directives, and/or Attorney General certification of contrary law.

· Work with federal and state lawmakers to further decriminalization efforts nationwide.

8. Restore Discretion and Proportionality

Two 1996 laws have had outsized effects in upending the immigration system and limiting reform. Combined they create severe and often unassailable penalties for offenses which may be decades old, for which individuals may have served their time, or for mistakes which would otherwise be counterbalanced by positive equities. These include, for instance, disproportionate penalties for drug offenses, crossing the border without authorization, and residing in the United States without lawful status. These laws also established mechanisms for fast-track deportations; eliminated various defenses to removal; limited family unification petitions; and mandated detention for large categories of noncitizens.

The country has increasingly recognized the importance of rehabilitation, and the need for greater proportionality in our laws. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA) and the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) epitomize the opposite. These 1996 anti-immigrant laws require radical reform, as envisioned by the New Way Forward Act.[15]

At the same time, the Trump Administration has chipped away at the state legislation aimed at correcting legally flawed convictions and sentences rendering immigrants subject to deportation, and has long refused to recognize rehabilitation-based expungements. The Biden Administration must put an end to this attack on state sovereignty and embrace efforts to bring conviction records in line with constitutional protections, as well as reforming immigration law to embrace a redemption-based model of criminal justice.

The Biden Administration should:

· Work with Congress to pass the New Way Forward Act and roll back the draconian 1996 laws (IIRAIRA and AEDPA) that expanded deportability, eliminated defenses and pathways to lawful status, and mandated detention.

· Restore discretion and proportionality in immigration enforcement by doing away with absolute bars to legalization or second chances.

· Retract Trump-era policies and decisions that refuse to give full faith and credit to the intended impact of state vacaturs and sentence modifications.

· Redefine “conviction” to honor state legislative distinctions, including rehabilitative dismissals and expungements.

· Minimize disparate outcomes that result from differences in state sentencing procedures, i.e., by reinterpreting “term of imprisonment” to exclude sentences and clarifying that references to “one year or more” within the immigration statute refer to felonies only.

· Reject unequivocally the “felons, not families” rhetoric in establishing deportation priorities – which serves only to dehumanize those with prior criminal convictions who also have families and communities.

· End Operation Streamline and the criminal prosecution of illegal entry and re-entry which are victimless offenses and lead to mass incarceration.

· Promote restoration of the use of ICE stays of removal and orders of supervision as a discretionary tool to prevent deportation even after removal order; and restore work permit eligibility for those under Orders of Supervision.[16]

9. Restore Pathways to Lawful Immigration Status without Criminal Carveouts

The Trump Administration has undermined the capacity of the immigration system to provide immigration relief where appropriate, weakening and politicizing the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and refusing to exercise discretion to provide protection to those in need. But the Trump Administration only exacerbated the extraordinary limitations on pathways to legal status which had already been instituted by the 1996 laws. Indeed, without the 1996 laws, an estimated half of current unauthorized immigrants in the United States today would have likely been able to attain lawful status.[17] It is not that there are fewer people willing to “wait in line” to get legal status today; it is that the lines disappeared and those left stranded were the ones blamed. It is past time to restore pathways to legalization which do not reinforce the outdated criminal carveouts which have increasingly defined immigration policy.

The Biden Administration should:

· Greatly expand deferred action, parole-in-place, and administrative closures of removal cases to promote family unity, offer protection to those fleeing violence, and ameliorate the draconian impact of the current limitations on legalization.

· Increase pathways to legalization for all immigrants, including lifting numeric caps on existing applications to alleviate backlogs and expanding eligibility criteria, by executive action where possible or legislative action where necessary.

· Eliminate absolute criminal bars to both DACA and Temporary Protected Status (TPS), restoring discretion to USCIS.

· Create new designations for TPS for Northern Triangle countries devastated by the COVID pandemic, natural disasters, and gang and cartel violence.

· Work with Congress to establish a path to permanent status for long-time DACA and TPS holders.

· Ensure adequate resources and independence for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to allow it to effectively and efficiently adjudicate applications for relief.

· Review and expand, where possible, regulations granting access to apply for employment authorization while pursuing lawful status, including claims for relief for removal.

10. Defund ICE and Reallocate the Immigration Enforcement Budget to Higher Priority Humanitarian Needs Such as Family Unification

President-elect Biden has recognized that budgets define priorities: “Don’t tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value.”[18] DHS’ ballooning budget is directly responsible for increased raids, family separations, fear-based anti-immigrant messaging, and a destructive border wall. Reallocated funds would better represent the nation’s priorities.

ICE was first created after September 11, 2001 with the goal of promoting national security and stopping terrorist attacks on our soil. It has morphed into the federal government’s largest law enforcement agency, and has been responsible for breaking up hundreds of thousands of mixed-status families through deportation and detention.

The federal government spends more than $20 billion dollars on immigration enforcement. This is a waste of taxpayer resources that has led to poverty, trauma, and family separation. This is unprecedented and unnecessary. The border patrol budget has increased tenfold since 1993; CBP and ICE spending has tripled since the 2003 establishment of DHS.[19] As the enforcement budget has swelled so too have deportations—from 21,000 annually during the Reagan Administration to 108,000 annually during the Clinton Administration to over 250,000 during the G.W. Bush, Obama and Trump Administrations. In recent years, the majority of those deported from the interior have resided in this country for more than ten years. Instead of spending billions on deportation, we must reinvest in our communities, including our crumbling schools and health care infrastructure. This reinvestment in communities of color reflects a broader commitment to invest in communities that are overpoliced to avoid involvement in the deportation pipeline.

The Biden Administration should:

· Dramatically reduce the budget for immigration enforcement to rein in the ICE dragnet and align with reconfigured enforcement priorities.

· Redirect funds to legalization efforts, including legal representation in removal proceedings and USCIS adjudication. Additionally, funds should be directed to address the backlog in immigration courts, including resources to enhance due process and expand alternatives to detention like community-based models of non-profit case management.

· Shift enforcement away from punitive, raids-based enforcement to incentives-based enforcement.[20]

Members of the Public Defenders Coalition for Immigrant Justice:

National Association for Public Defense, National

National Alliance of Mitigation Specialists and Sentencing Advocates (NASAMS), of the National Legal Aid & Defender Association, National

Gideon’s Promise, National

AFSCME Local 2435 (appellate public defenders), Oregon

Alameda County Public Defender’s Office, California

Bexar County Public Defender’s Office, Texas

The Bronx Defenders, New York

Brooklyn Defenders Service, New York

California Public Defenders Association, California

City of Atlanta Public Defenders Office, Georgia

Committee for Public Counsel Services, Massachusetts

Contra Costa Defender Association, California

East Baton Rouge Public Defender's Office, Louisiana

Harris County Public Defender’s Office, Texas

Indigent Defense Association Sonoma County, California

The Keep Tucson Together (KTT) Community Immigration Defense Clinic, Arizona

Lancaster County Public Defender, Nebraska

The Law Office of the Cook County Public Defender, Illinois

Law Offices Los Angeles County Public Defender, California

Legal Aid Society, New York

Marin County Public Defenders, California

Maryland Office of the Public Defender, Maryland

Metropolitan Public Defender, Oregon

Montgomery County Public Defender's Office, Alabama

The Metropolitan Public Defender’s Office, Nashville, Tennessee

Neighborhood Defenders Service of Harlem, New York

New York County Defender Services, New York

Orleans Public Defenders, Louisiana

Pima County Public Defender, Arizona

Public Defender Division, Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, Texas

Public Defender’s Office, 11^th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Florida

Santa Barbara County Public Defender, California

Santa Clara County Public Defender, California

Santa Cruz County Public Defender, California

San Francisco Public Defender’s Office, California

Southern Center for Human Rights, Georgia

Stanislaus County Public Defender’s Office, California

Travis County Public Defender’s Office, Texas

Travis County Juvenile Public Defender’s Office, Texas

Washington Defender Association, Washington

[1] The Immigration Enforcement Moratorium Act—proposed legislation to establish an immigration moratorium in the context of the COVID pandemic—is instructive in the transition context. See https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/4011/text?r=7&s=1.

[2] “Biden commits to moratorium on deportation of immigrants”, Melissa Gomez, LOS ANGELES TIMES, March 15, 2020, https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-03-15/joe-biden-bernie-sanders-deportations-coronavirus-healthcare.

[3] Executive Orders on Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States & Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements (January 25, 2017 ); DHS Memoranda Implementing the President's Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements Policies (which expanded expedited removal to the interior) and Enforcement of the Immigration Laws to Serve the National Interest (which expanded the Criminal Alien Program and ended prosecutorial discretion) (February 20, 2017).

[4] See TRAC, “Most Released Families Attend Immigration Court Hearings,” at https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/562/.

[5] See U.S. Gov’t Accountability Office, “Alternatives to Detention,” Nov. 2014, at https://www.gao.gov/assets/670/666911.pdf; https://www.vera.org/publications/immigrant-court-appearance-fact-sheet.

[6] The Biden Plan for Strengthening America’s Commitment to Justice, at https://joebiden.com/justice/.

[7] See, e.g., Justice for Immigrants, “The Real Alternatives to Detention,” June 2019, at https://justiceforimmigrants.org/what-we-are-working-on/immigrant-detention/real-alternatives-detention/.

[8] See, e.g., California Assembly Bill 103 (2017) (charging the California Department of Justice with monitoring conditions of confinement in detention facilities in that state), at https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB103..

[9] See, e.g., Ingrid Eagly & Steven Shafer, “Access to Counsel in Immigration Court,” American Immigration Council, Sept. 2016, at https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/access_to_counsel_in_immigration_court.pdf.

[10] I. Eagly et al, “A National Study of Access to Counsel in Immigration Court,” U. of Pennsylvania Law Review, 164, no. 1 (2015), 1-91, https://perma.cc/82F5-WE2D.

[11] Id.

[12] Id.

[13] See TRAC, “Asylum Denial Rates Continue to Climb,” at https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/630/; Tal Kopan, “AG William Barr Promotes Immigration Judges with High Asylum Denial Rates,” S.F. Chronicle, Aug. 23, 2019, at https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/AG-William-Barr-promotes-immigration-judges-with-14373344.php.

[14] See American Bar Association, “ABA Urges Congress to Create Separate Immigration Courts,” at https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2019/07/aba-urges-congress-to-create/.

[15] See H.R. 5383 (Garcia) at https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5383. See also Immigrant Justice Network, “New Way Forward for Immigrant Justice,” at http://immigrantjusticenetwork.org/newwayforward/; Dara Lind, “The Disastrous, Forgotten 1996 Law that Created Today’s Immigration Problem,” Vox, Apr. 28, 2016, at https://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11515132/iirira-clinton-immigration.

[16] See https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/dhs-proposes-to-limit-work-permits-for-aliens-with-final-orders-of-removal#:~:text=Orders%20of%20supervision%20allow%20DHS,alien%20from%20the%20United%20States.

[17] Alex Nowrasteh, “Removing the 3/10 Year Bars Is Not Amnesty,” Cato at Liberty, Apr. 23, 2014, at https://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11515132/iirira-clinton-immigration; https://www.cato.org/blog/removing-310-year-bars-not-amnesty.

[18] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuLwjFmESrg.

[19] See American Immigration Council, “The Cost of Immigration Enforcement and Border Security,” July 2020, at https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/the_cost_of_immigration_enforcement_and_border_security.pdf.

[20] See Peter Markowitz, “A New Paradigm for Humane and Effective Immigration Enforcement,” Center for American Progress, Nov. 30, 2020, at https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/reports/2020/11/30/493173/new-paradigm-humane-effective-immigration-enforcement/.