Prince William County suits against DHS will shine light on deportation flaws

A Border Patrol agent sits next to an improvised fence built for protection against rocks that are thrown from the Mexican side of the border. (Photo by Gerald L. Nino, US CBP)Prince William County (Virginia) has filed a second lawsuit against the US Dept. of Homeland Security because DHS has refused to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests. The county board of supervisors wanted information about records concerning the disposition of criminal illegal aliens identified by the county and turned over to DHS.

The first lawsuit was spurred after a criminal illegal alien, Carlos Martinelly Montano, was handed over to DHS for deportation. Montano had been convicted of DUI and identified as an illegal alien.

However, Montano was then released by DHS. Somehow Montano was issued an Employment Authorization Card. After that, he was involved in an automobile accident where he was charged with killing a Benedictine Nun while driving drunk in Prince William County in August, 2010. Because of DHS’s failure to adequately detain and deport Mr. Montano, the board of supervisors wanted information from DHS.

The second lawsuit relates to information about nearly 3,000 other criminal illegal aliens released to DHS.

DHS appears to be disregarding federal laws on deportation and on the FOIA.

The cases are important for a number of reasons. For one thing, any state bearing the burden of a large population of foreign nationals who break federal law has grounds to sue agencies responsible for upholding federal law. The fact that Congress and more than one US president have thumbed their noses at concerns about America’s open borders suggests states have viable cases, especially in light of the aggression the US Dept. of Justice has displayed towards states who attempt to come up with legislation to address the issue.

It doesn’t matter if state legislation mimics federal legislation—the Obama administration will still spend money and funds to sue American states on behalf of foreign nationals.

The Center for Immigration Studies issued a backgrounder on deportation in July, 2011 written by a former government employee with years of experience in immigration, law enforcement and national security. Writing under the name W. D. Reasoner, the retired official pointed out the system needs to be improved and he believes that could be done via regulation rather than through legislative action.

Reasoner cites some troubling facts. He said as many as 59 percent of aliens awaiting hearings flee, willingly forfeiting bond money  in hopes of waiting for the next amnesty.

Reasoner also said charging an alien with immigration violations “is a paperwork intensive, cumbersome process that requires agents to fill out  nearly 20 different forms each time.”

The backgrounder serves the purpose of a mini-course in deportation basics.

Reasoner also suggests the Obama administration’s “prosecutorial discretion” policy puts ICE field officers at a definite disadvantage. If the illegal alien an officer doesn’t remove goes on to commit a violent crime, the officer might be sued by victims and held accountable by the government as well.

The CIS report discloses, “The total number of apprehensions of illegal aliens by immigration enforcement agencies is less than half of what it was five years ago.” ICE apprehensions have also “dropped steeply, although there has been only a modest drop in the size of the illegal population inside the United States.”

Related Articles at The US Report

Immigrants and illegal entrants have big impact on welfare spending

Dream Act aside, immigration system needs investigation

(Analysis by Kay B. Day/August 4, 2011)

You can easily ‘rattle’ the tip jar at The US Report by using the PayPal link in the right column.