What you should know about Expedited Removal of Aliens in the U.S.

By Atty. Crispin Caday Lozano

 

President Trump Executive Order 13767 on January 25, 2017 instructs the DHS to implement and expand Expedited Removal.  We will discuss what it is and how those affected should protect themselves. 

 

Q. What is expedited removal, and who does it apply to now?

A. Expedited removal is a procedure that allows a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official to summarily remove a noncitizen without a hearing before an immigration judge or review by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), any individual who arrives at a port of entry in the United States and who is inadmissible under either misrepresentations and false claims to U.S. citizenship or lack of valid entry documents, is subject to expedited removal. Additionally, the Secretary of DHS has the authority to apply expedited removal to any individual apprehended at a place other than a port of entry, who is inadmissible under either of those grounds, has not been admitted or paroled, and cannot show that he or she has been continuously present in the United States for two or more years.

To date, DHS has limited its application of expedited removal to noncitizens inadmissible for one of the above-stated grounds who either arrive at a port of entry or are apprehended within 14 days of their arrival and within 100 miles of an international land border.

Q. How does expedited removal differ from removal proceedings before an immigration judge?

A. Expedited removal is substantially different from removal proceedings in immigration court conducted. In removal proceedings, an immigration judge hears the case. Noncitizens may have an attorney represent them (at their own expense), may apply for relief from removal, and are entitled to substantial due process protections. Finally, even if an immigration judge orders an individual removed, that person may appeal the decision, first to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and then to a federal court of appeals.

Expedited removal, as applied by DHS, does not have any of those procedural protections. The DHS officer who is authorized to issue an order of expedited removal operates as prosecutor and judge and often arrests an individual and orders him or her deported on the same day. With limited exceptions, discussed below, the government takes the position that noncitizens subject to expedited removal have no right to an appeal. 

Q. After someone is arrested by DHS, how can she show that she must receive an immigration court hearing, rather than be subject to expedited removal?

A. It is too early to know how DHS will implement an expansion of expedited removal. As noted above, DHS has discretion to elect between issuing an expedited removal order, allowing withdrawal of an application for admission or issuing a Notice to Appear and placing the individual in removal proceedings before an immigration judge. Requesting that DHS exercise its prosecutorial discretion to either allow withdrawal of an application for admission or issue a Notice to Appear is advisable.

Furthermore, the INA provides that an individual may be subject to expedited removal only if she or he “has not affirmatively shown, to the satisfaction of an immigration officer, that [she or he] has been physically present in the United States continuously for the 2-year period immediately prior to the date of the determination of inadmissibility.” Therefore, DHS officers are obligated to put an individual into immigration court proceedings, rather than expedited removal, if that person provides proof that she or he has been present in the United States for two years (or a lesser amount of time depending upon the scope of any expansion of expedited removal).  However, there are pros and cons to carrying documents demonstrating length of residency 

Q. Is there a way to ask the issuing agency to reconsider or reopen an expedited removal order?

A. Yes, expedited removal orders are covered by 8 C.F.R. § 103.5, which governs motions to reopen or reconsider DHS decisions.

Any motion to reopen (based on new evidence) or reconsider (based on an incorrect application of law or policy) should be filed with the DHS office that issued the expedited removal order.

The motion should explain both why DHS should vacate the expedited removal order on legal or equitable grounds and why the person subject to the order is eligible for and/or deserving of the requested relief. For example, if the motion seeks cancellation of the expedited removal order to allow the person to withdraw his or her application for admission, the motion should evaluate each factor a CBP officer would consider in deciding such a request. If the motion seeks cancellation of the expedited removal order and issuance of a Notice to Appear, the motion should demonstrate what relief is available to the person in removal proceedings before an immigration judge.

Lastly, DHS has discretion to elect between issuing an expedited removal order, allowing withdrawal of an application for admission pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(a)(4), or issuing a Notice to Appear and placing the individual in removal proceedings before an immigration judge. Counsel always can request that DHS exercise its prosecutorial discretion to either allow withdrawal of an application for admission or issue a Notice to Appear.

Note:  This is not a legal advice and you should seek the advice of an immigration attorney for your personal circumstances.

SUCCESS STORIES

 

  1. For the week ending September 8, 2017, we received four N-400 Naturalization approvals.
  2. On August 31, 2017 we received an approval of adjustment of status for a client who problems with birth certificate which we corrected.
  3. On August 25, 2017, we received approval of I-751 removal of condition on same sex marriage/
  4. On August 18, 2017, we received two approvals for N-400 applications.
  5. On August 16, 2017, we received an approval of I-601A provisional waiver for a Mexican client.
  6. On August 10, 2017, we received a grant from the Immigration Court on a Motion to Terminate Removal Proceedings for a client whose criminal case we have dismissed in criminal court.
  7. On July 18, 2017, we received an approval of green card at the U.S. Embassy Manila for the family of a client who was granted a waiver of misrepresentation. His wife and children were approved after the court granted the waiver.
  8. On June 28, 2017, we received a withdrawal of inadmissibility and removability charges from the Customs and Border Enforcement for a client who was charged with drug case while he was entering San Francisco Airport from the Philippines. The case was withdrawn after we have expunged the drug case in Criminal Court.

 

If you have immigration problems the Law Offices of Crispin C. Lozano can help you find a solution before your problem gets worse which could lead to deportation and family separation. 

Crispin Caday Lozano, Esq. is an active member of the State Bar of California, the American Immigration Lawyers Association and San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association.  He specializes in immigration law and personal injury.  For free consultation email or call (crispinlozano@gmail.com/ 1-877-456-9266)



Toll Free 1-877-4LOZANO for free consultation or Schedule an Appointment