Q&A – Expedited Removal of Illegal Immigrants - Driven By Braman Motorcars
Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.
Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com
Social: @brianmuddradio
iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station’s page in the iHeart app.
Today’s Entry: Today’s note was submitted via talkback asking about whether “expedited removal” can be used to speed the Trump administration's efforts to remove illegal immigrants.
Bottom Line: This is a great question amid the ongoing legal wranglings the Trump administration finds itself in regarding the extent to which illegal immigrants are entitled to “due process” prior to deportation. What’s known as expedited removal was established under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. The purpose was to aid the Border Patrol’s efforts to act decisively in the field to combat illegal immigration, in addition to imposing stronger penalties for illegal activity committed by those in the country illegally. It’s also a law that the Trump administration is currently enforcing/using daily.
The law authorizing expedited removal applies to those:
- Apprehended at or near the border (within 100 miles) who cannot prove they’ve been in the U.S. for more than 14 days.
- Arrive at a port of entry without valid entry documents or with fraudulent documents.
- Are deemed by authorities to be inadmissible
This is the law that effectively allows President Trump’s Remain in Mexico order to be carried out by Border Patrol at the point of contact within the US without additional legal consideration. The process works like this...
- A Customs and Border Protection or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer determines inadmissibility.
- The individual is issued a removal order (generally an immediate order)
- No legal process is granted
- Asylum seekers may request a "credible fear interview" with an asylum officer. If they pass, they can pursue asylum in regular proceedings; if not, they face removal
The “credible fear” process was a process that was rescinded by the Biden administration effectively allowing anyone who didn’t show up on a watch or restricted list to enter the country seeking asylum. It was the policy decision which opened the floodgates leading to the record numbers of illegal immigrants entering the country during his administration. The courts have found over 97% of asylum seekers lacked legitimate asylum claims in recent years. That’s the crux of the existing challenge. In theory most illegal immigrants who’ve been in this country, for any reason, for over 14 days may attempt to stake a claim to due process (even though most asylum seekers never show up for court dates which are often years into the future).
To date, since the reimplementation of the Remain in Mexico policy, only 9 encounters with Border Patrol agents have resulted in entry into the United States. The Trump administration, starting with his first administration, has expanded using of expedited removals to apply to anyone anywhere in the country. This is where some of the legal challenges have been brought as the administration has sought to engage in large scale deportations of those who’ve potentially been in the U.S. for over 14 days without consideration for “due process”.
During President Trump’s first administration an estimated total of 935,000 deportations, or 62% of all deportations, took place using expedited removal. Detailed deportation information is limited at this point in President Trump’s second administration – it's detailed in annual reporting – however it’s likely an even greater percentage of deportations thus far having taken place using this law given the administration's focus on locking down the southern border (with the lowest levels of “gottways” on record) and targeting of criminal illegal immigrants for deportations.
As federal courts, up to and including the United States Supreme Court, are set to address legal challenges pertaining to potential “due process” rights of illegal immigrants detained by DHS, it’s likely that we’ll see courts either limit the extent to which expedited removal may be used, or if found in favor of the Trump administration, could be significantly expanded.