Fact Sheet
Published on June 20, 2014
The current surge of migrants crossing the southern U.S. border reflects a sharp increase in the number of unaccompanied minors, children crossing with one or both parents, and adults who are seeking asylum and are detained in “expedited removal” processing. The overwhelming majority of these people are from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, with many fleeing rising violence and instability in their home countries.
In April 2014, Human Rights First visited key border points, border patrol stations and immigration detention facilities in Arizona, California and Texas, to research the increase in the last two years of adult asylum seekers. Since our visits, even greater increases in the number of families – in particular single parents with children – crossing the border and seeking protection have been reported. Human Rights First’s recommendations on how the United States should handle this influx carry even more urgency now.
The Obama Administration and the U.S. Congress have the tools to confront the complex challenges at the border, but they need to act quickly to do so. While effectively confronting the influx at the border will require addressing the impunity and rule of law deficits that are driving many to flee in search of protection, the immediate response of the administration and Congress to the challenges posed by the increase in unaccompanied children, families and other migrants at the border should also ensure effective implementation of safeguards for asylum seekers, victims of trafficking, and others with protection concerns. The United States has a strong interest in maintaining the integrity and effectiveness of its immigration and asylum systems and safeguarding them from abuse.
The following are key steps that the Administration and Congress can take to directly and immediately address the increase in families, unaccompanied children, and other vulnerable populations crossing the border:
Maximize use of alternatives to detention
Cost effective alternatives to detention enjoy broad support in the criminal justice system and have a demonstrated track record of supporting appearance but are under-used on a national level. For border cases where immigration authorities determine there is concern about flight risk and compliance, DHS should use alternative measures instead of costly jails and detention facilities.
Strengthen – do not weaken – protection safeguards
Many apprehended at or after crossing the border are placed into expedited removal, through which individuals can be deported without a court hearing. To protect asylum seekers, Congress created the “credible fear” screening process. As it addresses the influx, DHS should strengthen – and not weaken – safeguards to protect asylum seekers, trafficking victims and other vulnerable individuals.
These interviews should occur within 14 days of arrival, but also allow for a short several day waiting period for asylum seekers to recover from their travels and receive a legal orientation presentation. USCIS should request, and Congress allocate, the resources needed to meet the credible fear caseload without taking resources from the affirmative process. DHS should implement protection safeguards recommended by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.
Increase access to legal information and counsel
Many individuals expressing a fear of return lack critical information about U.S. immigration and asylum laws and the requirements that they are expected to fulfill if they are placed into removal proceedings and/or released from detention. The lack of access to information and counsel is exacerbated in detention facilities – currently only 25 of ICE’s approximately 250 detention centers have a formal Legal Orientation Program (LOP), and nationally around one in five detained immigrants does not have a lawyer in proceedings.
Reduce backlogs and vulnerability to abuse
Funding for the immigration courts that process removal cases of those who enter and apply for asylum or other relief has not kept pace with funding levels for immigration enforcement. Over 366,000 immigration removal cases, including those involving claims for asylum, have now been pending for an average of 578 days, undermining the system’s integrity and leaving it vulnerable to abuse. Similarly, the USCIS Asylum Division has had to redeploy so many of its staff to process credible fear claims that it now has a backlog in affirmative asylum applications.
The full Human Rights First Blueprint is available at: http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/resource/how-protect-refugees-and-prevent-abuse-border.
Downloads:
