Day 4 in El Paso: At the Intersection of Immigration Law, Criminal Law and Human Rights

Observed federal judges sentence noncitizens for illegal re-entry (8 U.S.C 1326) cases. Listened to a federal prosecutor talk about how he exercises prosecutorial discretion. Heard a public defense attorney discuss how Padilla v. Kentucky affected his practice. Ate pizzas with residents of Annunciation House, a volunteer-based organization that provides accompaniment, hospitality and advocacy for migrants and then learned how to dance cumbia from them. Listened to an 18 year old noncitizen explain his story about crossing the border. These were just a few of the things that we did today as part of the program on border enforcement.

Crimmigration

The day began at 8 AM in the federal courthouse. We heard several cases involving noncitizens who were prosecuted for violating 8 U.S.C. 1326. One of the most compelling cases from the day involved a young mother who was tricked into driving an elderly woman across the border not knowing that the car she was driving had illegal drugs. The federal prosecutors confirmed that, through surveillance, they know that the defendant was deceived by people involved in trafficking drugs. Thus, when the defense attorney asked for time served, which the judge granted, the government did not object.  

Later in the classroom, we discussed the proceedings we observed in court and engaged in a discussion about the ways in which federal criminal law is used to essentially enforce immigration law. Specifically, we examined 8 U.S.C 1325 (illegal entry), 8 U.S.C. 1326 (illegal re-entry) and 8 U.S. 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) [anti-harboring provision). Specifically, we discussed Operation Streamline and the “100 percent” prosecutorial approach taken by the federal government.  We also examined arguments against the policy, including those issued by the UC Berkeley School of Law’s Warren Institute’s report critiquing Operation Streamline.

Two guest speakers, a federal prosecutor and federal public defender, spoke to my class and provided more in-depth explanation of the contours and practice of illegal re-entry cases. The students appreciated learning about the specifics of each case and how to prove and defend illegal re-entry cases.  What struck me about the two speakers is how similar they are, even though they are typically on separate sides of the aisles. Both are Mexican American men who grew up in El Paso. Both miss the days of being able to travel back and forth between El Paso and Ciudad Juarez with greater ease than now. Notably, both are lawyers who seemed to have a strong sense of justice and want meaningful immigration reform. 

Human Rights

For me, the most memorable event for the day was the tour and fellowship dinner at Annunciation House. We arrived there a little after 5 PM and received a tour of the house. Volunteers at Annunciation House (who do not receive compensation) work and live in the house to provide fellowship and human rights advocacy for migrants who crossed the border. Many of the residents have potential asylum and CAT claims and are in need of pro bono assistance. (I will blog hopefully next week, after getting the blog entry approved, some of the stories that we heard).

We had dinner with the residents and mingled with them. Some of the students spoke Spanish and had lively conversations with the residents. Some of the residents and students communicated with each other in mixed English/Spanish. The best part of the night was when one of the residents set up an organ and another began singing. A bunch of us started dancing with the residents, a couple of whom taught us cumbia.  Other students went outside to play basketball with some of the residents.  Our night ended with smiles, handshakes and hugs. As our bus left Annunciation House at 8 PM, we waved goodbye to the residents.

This morning we saw people get sentenced for crossing the border illegaly. Tonight, we danced with people who did the same thing. What a stark difference from the way our day began. 

RCV