Ninth Circuit Will Revisit Migrant Bail
AZCentral.com reports that the Ninth Circuit intends to address Arizona’s controversial Proposition 100 once more in court. The law stipulates that illegally present immigrants in Arizona cannot be granted bail if they are charged with “serious crimes.” In 2006, when the law was passed, the Legislature defined “serious crimes” as Class 1, 2, 3, and 4 felonies, meaning that the term refers not only to rape and murder, but also non-violent crimes such as forgery with intent to commit fraud, conspiracy to commit human smuggling, and identity theft. Judge Raymond Fisher referred to the bill’s bail denial as a “method of punishment” for illegally present immigrants, rather than a means to help manage arrestee’s flight risk. Cecilia Wang, a San Francisco based attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, claimed that the law violates due process, since people accused of crimes have a constitutional right to be evaluated individually for flight risk.
Proposition 100 is one of many laws passed by Arizona that conflict with federal immigration law. Many of Arizona’s laws have been shut down by federal courts for attempting to pre-empt federal law. The Ninth Circuit has ordered the case against Proposition 100 be reheard before a panel of eleven judges, as opposed to previous panels of only three.
*
Mexican Immigrant Can Practice Law, California Court Rules
LAtimes.com reports that Sergio C. Garcia won the right to practice law in California while he waits for federal approval of his green card application. Currently, Mexican national Garcia has no green card, technically rendering him an undocumented immigrant. This ruling could prove beneficial to similar cases pending in New York and in Florida. The case came about after a September hearing found that a 1996 federal law would deny Garcia and others lacking legal status all public benefits (such as a law license), unless legislatures specifically approved exemptions. In October, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a law providing an exemption for law licenses for qualifying undocumented immigrants. Bill Hing, a law professor at the University of San Francisco, stated that he estimates at least two dozen immigrants lacking green cards graduate from California law schools each year. Many immigrants, according to Hing, were sworn in to practice before the state bar began asking about immigration status in 2008.
*
In Immigration Courts, Criminal Activity Continues to Drop as Removal Reason
The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) and Syracuse University reports that since the beginning of fiscal 2014, only 13.5% of removal orders have pertained to individual criminal activity. In fiscal 2013, Immigration Courts cited criminal activity as the basis for 14.2% of removal orders, and 15.5% in fiscal 2012. Only 3.6% of removed individuals were charged with aggravated felony provisions so far this year.
http://trac.syr.edu/whatsnew/email.131211.html
Disclaimer: This newsletter is provided as a public service and not intended to establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.