Official Says Immigration Program Up for Review

Erica Werner, AP, May 16, 2014

President Barack Obama’s review of the nation’s deportation policies may result in changes to a contentious program that hands over people booked for local crimes to federal immigration authorities.

But such steps are unlikely to satisfy advocates demanding dramatic action to help millions of people living here illegally.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, offering his first public hints at the outcome of the review he’s conducting at Obama’s behest, said Thursday that the so-called Secure Communities program needs a “fresh start.” He suggested it might be revamped to focus on people who actually have been convicted of crimes, not just those arrested or booked.

“In my judgment, Secure Communities should be an efficient way to work with state and local law enforcement to reach the removal priorities that we have, those who are convicted of something,” Johnson said on PBS’ “NewsHour.”

{snip}

The program allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to run fingerprints of anyone booked for a local or state crime through a federal database for immigration violations. If there’s a match, ICE can ask local police and sheriffs to detain the person, and then decide whether to deport them.

The program, which was started in 2008 under the Bush administration but has been expanded under Obama, has led to complaints that people are being deported for immigration violations without being convicted of any crime, or with only minor offenses. Police and sheriff’s officials also complain people are afraid to interact with law enforcement and report crimes because they worry they’ll be deported.

States including California and local governments in Oregon and elsewhere have begun refusing to honor all detention requests, something that’s increase in the wake of recent court rulings raising questions about the program.

Many advocates, who have been holding hunger strikes and rallies to protest record-high deportations on Obama’s watch, want Secure Communities eliminated entirely.

“We’re skeptical that this is going to be the meaningful change that the community is asking for,” said Kamal Essaheb, an attorney at the National Immigration Law Center. “We don’t want any changes around the edges. This is a program that’s poisoned trust between police and immigrant communities.”

More than 150 civil and immigrant rights groups signed a letter to Johnson Friday urging him to end the use of immigrant detentions under Secure Communities.

Changes to Secure Communities also would fall far short of the sweeping action advocates are pushing to expand a 2-year-old program that’s allowed hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought illegally to the country as youths to stay and work here legally. Johnson said he was still reviewing that possibility, but he sounded a note of caution.

“I would say that we have to be careful not to pre-empt Congress in certain areas,” Johnson said.

{snip}

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, offering his first public hints at the outcome of the review he’s conducting at Obama’s behest, said Thursday that the so-called Secure Communities program needs a “fresh start.” He suggested it might be revamped to focus on people who actually have been convicted of crimes, not just those arrested or booked.

    While it’s very difficult actually to deport anyone, in spite of the propaganda that this article presents, the irony is that those illegal aliens convicted of serious crimes are even harder to deport than the garden variety illegal alien. The reason is that for a real deportation to happen, the alien’s home country has to accept him. And their home countries are in no mood to want to take in violent felons, and gee, I wonder why.

    • r j p

      Put them in a prison van, drive them 500 miles into a remote interior area of Mexico and kick them out on the side of the road.

      • Ahnenerbe ᛟ

        and shoot them in the back of the head. That will keep them away

      • 1stworlder

        a brand so they will be recognized if they come back

      • mobilebay

        Fill up those huge jets and put them out on the airport tarmacs in their own country and put a sign on them saying, “They’re your problem, not ours.”
        The cost would be worth it to be rid of them. A true MEXI-CON AIR!

    • 1stworlder

      Take them to the border brand them and give them a choice firing squad or deportation.

    • me

      Why this current administration is acting like a bunch of schizophrenic lunatics is hard to understand unless you have a certain way of looking at it.
      Firstly, Obummer is, on one hand, quite anti-White racist. He sees the White man as an ‘oppressor’ of his people–even though he’s half-White and was raised by his White grandparents. He and Eric Holder are probably the most dangerously biased and racist people I have ever seen in higher office, even worse than Lyndon “progressive” Johnson. Everything they do is in support of Black advancement. The policies they make are both immoral and Constitutionally illegal, but their contempt of the “White man’s law” in favor of Black advocacy has resulted in a level of corruption and lawlessness that would very well tear this country apart. The insistence of private employers, regardless of the rights of these business owners, into hiring Black convicted felons with a vast criminal record, is just one example. Their doctrine of the distribution of wealth, lands, and production by one set of peoples to another is pure, undiluted communism; as well as their insistence that the Federal ‘government’ is an all-powerful entity that can unlawfully implement dictatorial orders to the people of this country is another example of communistic principles…
      On the other hand, every pro-amnesty bill and pro-amnesty allowance made for Mexican nationals, whether within the bounds of the law or not, helps to harm the Black community as a whole. Chicago is an excellent example. The illegal amnesty and favoritism that this administration shows towards Mexican lawbreakers is in direct opposition with Black advocacy. Mexicans have already resulted in the displacement of Blacks in several communities, such as Compton, CA. And, with the flooding in of unskilled workers into the job market, Black unemployment and poverty have risen dramatically in the last decade. Schizophrenic, no? Why? International corporate and banking interests implemented on a global scale, run by a small cartel of plutocrats. And, unfortunately, the power grabbing greed of the globalist, New World Order architects have no respect for the sovereignty of nations or peoples–or who gets destroyed in the process.

  • MekongDelta69

    “President Barack Obama’s review of the nation’s deportation policies…”

    Translation:
    Amnesty for every illegal alien, whether they committed violent crimes or not.

    “We need the votes…”

    • Nancy Thomas

      Yes, criminals vote democrat.

    • 1stworlder

      Keep your guns like Obama’s voters
      UNDOCUMENTED

  • JohnEngelman

    The program, which was started in 2008 under the Bush administration but has been expanded under Obama, has led to complaints that people are being deported for immigration violations without being convicted of any crime.

    – Erica Werner, AP, May 16, 2014

    Excuse me. Their presence in this country is a crime.

    • Bossman

      Their presence in the USA has been defined by law as a misdemeanor. A civil offence no greater than a traffic ticket. There are all kinds of valid reasons why it is so defined.

      • JohnEngelman

        What are those valid reasons?

        I think their presence should be a felony. I think they should be tattooed before deportation in order to make it more difficult for them to sneak back.

        • Bossman

          One valid reason is that there could be no way to lock up 15 million people for several years.

          • dd121

            I bet I could come up with a way to do it.

          • JohnEngelman

            They should be arrested, tattooed, and deported.

          • RisingReich

            Gee wiz John. You sound like those NAZIs you love to hate so much. I guess marking people is okay with you, just so long as they aren’t of the yellow or Yiddish variety.

          • Bossman

            You’ve made a very good point.

          • WR_the_realist

            No one should be tattooed just for being Jewish, or just for being Mexican. But I’m okay with tattooing illegal immigrants.

          • Bill Moore

            Hello JohnEngleman,

            Excellent Suggestion! “… arrested, tattooed, and deported …”

            Let’s all spread that idea around.

            Thank you,

            Bill Moore

          • PvtCharlieSlate

            Basically a good idea … however this assumes that their value system is the same as ours. A deportation tattoo will probably be seen as a mark of honor – like a battle scar. Remove a body part instead: eye, hand, testicle. Get caught illegal here again and you lose the other one.

          • Ringo Lennon

            Don’t give them any sort of welfare.

      • Return after a prior felony conviction for an illegal alien is called “unlawful return” and is an automatic two-year federal felony. Of the 24 months, 21 months must be served, even with maximum time off for good behavior. The mere presence of the previously-convicted illegal alien in the courtroom is proof of unlawful return, so these are slam-dunk cases for any prosecutors who want them.

        • Bossman

          You’re talking about someone who was convicted of a felony and then deported who returned to the USA. That is very different from a visa-overstayer or someone who crossed the border without inspection.

      • WR_the_realist

        If I keep speeding I will eventually have my license taken away. If I drive without a license I will get a prison sentence. So a sufficiently continuous misdemeanor becomes a criminal act. I’d say most illegals have been midemeanoring enough for that to be the case.

  • Nancy Thomas

    Filth in a suit.

  • Nancy Thomas

    Can you imagine ANY other POTUS releasing 100,000 CRIMINAL illegals? Clinton was a slimeball but even Clinton wouldn’t have done anything like this. Obama thinks he’s the leader of a third world nation. The man has lost his mind.

    • IstvanIN

      No, he hasn’t lost his mind, unlike Bush and Clinton, who were agents of foreign powers, Obama is a foreigner working for foreign powers. He is deliberately working to destroy this nation. He is right on schedule, perhaps even ahead of schedule.

    • SoulInvictus

      “Obama thinks he’s the leader of a third world nation.”

      He is.

  • Ringo Lennon

    Only White people from Europe should be able to immigrate here. Also Canada and Australia.

    • I would be willing to allow open immigration from Japan as well. Their childbirth rate is even lower – at 1.4 children per couple – than for English-speaking whites, so they are no demographic threat to us. I am certainly in favor of deportation for all subcontinentals, all Africans, and all Muslims of any race.

      • Hallie Eva

        MCS, I would not. America was founded for Euro descended Whites, not Asians nor any other colored race with a non Euro culture.

        As it is, we already are swamped with Asians on the West Coast. Though they are crowding us, they reject our culture and in the end, hate us.

    • Bossman

      In an ideal world, that’s the way it could be. But if the USA ever attempted such a thing, it would’ve to give up the leadership of the free world. Words like like freedom and justice would ring hollow. BTW, who is that girl? She could be Latina. I would’nt be surprised if she was.

      • A Registered Racist

        “But if the USA ever attempted such a thing [limiting immigration to white people], it would have to give up the leadership of the free world. Words like freedom and justice would ring hollow.”
        That’s the kind of faulty reasoning used to justify desegregation and “civil rights” legislation during the Cold War era. And since then, words like freedom and justice have begun to ring hollow for a lot of us white Americans who must now abide by detrimental policies of immigration, integration, redistribution, and Affirmative Action.
        Obama has already given up leadership of the “free world,” and who needs that anyway? I’d gladly settle for a strong white democratic republic that stays out of foreign entanglements. I think that’s the model our Founders envisioned in the first place.

      • Ringo Lennon

        A beautiful white woman not no Indian Latina.

      • IstvanIN

        I would love to see the US give up leadership of the free world.

    • Whirlwinder

      That is what it was up until 1965 when Ted Kennedy and his fellow Marxist opened the floodgates with their new immigration legislation. Ole Teddy claimed that the new law would not change the ratio of white Americans to non-white immigrants, and our representatives bought this argument and passed the law!!!!!!

  • PvtCharlieSlate

    “… demanding dramatic action to help millions of people living here illegally.”

    This is like demanding that bank robbers be provided with financial advisors so they can invest the money they stole.

  • WR_the_realist

    The biggest criminal organization in America is the federal government.

  • MBlanc46

    The Obama administration will take not significant action to deport the millions who are in our country illegally. Nor would a Clinton administration. Nor would a Christie, Rubio, Paul, or Ryan administration. The only way change will come about is if we let them know clearly that more trouble will come about by not doing it than by doing it.

    • Then we will have another civil war.

      • IstvanIN

        Perhaps that is what we need. It would certainly settle the debate for a few generations.

        • It’ll probably settle the debate forever, because I suspect nukes will be used. The one element that Tom Chittum never addressed in “Civil War Two” was the use of nuclear weapons. Any rational discussion of another civil war must involve these.

          • IstvanIN

            A government that uses nuclear weapons to put down rebellion loses more than it gains.

          • Einsatzgrenadier

            Because of endless, massive third world immigration, I suspect that we’ll be dealing with a nuclear-armed Greater Mexico in the near future. Let’s hope that civil war (RAHOWA) breaks out sooner, rather than later, or else your future is going to have a lot of big, colorful piñatas in it.

          • IstvanIN

            You have a point. We should have taken out Mexico many years ago. Unlike Canada, a British founded nation like us, that we have enjoyed many years of peace with, Mexico has always been an unstable, hostile, underdeveloped thorn in our side.

          • Hallie Eva

            It amazes that people still take their holidays there. I used to, but would not step foot in Mexico now if I were paid.

          • I would do immediately.

          • IstvanIN

            Against who and where? Los Angles? Maybe. Philadelphia? That would take out the Whites in South Jersey, SE Penn and upstate DE. Not easy to do.

      • MBlanc46

        Or perhaps we’ll sink further into Third World conditions.

  • Greg Fannin

    ‘Police and sheriff’s officials also complain people are afraid to interact with law enforcement and report crimes because they worry they’ll be deported.’

    How novel. I bet carjackers and bank robbers are also afraid to interact with law enforcement and report crimes because they worry they’ll be imprisoned.