Democratic Party activists and their liberal pundit supporters are laser focused on the new illegal alien detention center in Florida that has been dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz”, earnestly and emphatically seeking to concentrate attention on conditions of custody for illegal aliens that they consider oppressive, extremely harsh, and even inhumane.
The assertions, beyond being sensationalistic and designed to evoke outrage, are simply slight-of-hand. These professional politicians and talking heads know – or should know – that no alien has to remain a resident of any immigration facility, including “Alligator Alcatraz”, for any significant period of time. That is because the alien has the “key to his jail cell”.
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) allows the U.S. government to detain a foreign national pending a determination on whether the alien is subject to removal or, in essence and once removal is determined, pending the removal of that alien from the United States (8 USC 1226; 8 USC 1231; Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281 (2018)). Detention pursuant to immigration law in this country is not allowed for any other purpose.
For these reasons, and put simply, an alien in the custody of the U.S. government solely for immigration violations has a choice: Either continue to press the issue of whether he or she is admissible or should be allowed to remain in this country, or abandon that effort and force the U.S. government to remove them to their home country or a third country that will accept them if their home country will not, which the alien can do simply by executing a written waiver of their right to a hearing, an appeal, and/or any other claims to having the legal ability or right to remain in the United States.
In short, an alien who seeks to avoid having to experience a stay at the “Alligator Alcatraz” facility can simply abandon their likely frivolous efforts and applications, and go home. Good advice for anyone who knows that they have no claim to any form of relief from removal, such as criminals or asylum applicants who do not fit the legal definition of “refugee” and are seeking to remain in this country for economic reasons.
While the law provides for many if not all aliens to have a hearing, be appeal of an adverse decision issued as a result of that hearing, and seek further judicial review to examine the proceedings below for error, an alien who knows or should know that they cannot prevail is doing nothing more than rolling the dice on the chance that they can somehow convince some court to give them what they are not factually or legally entitled to get. A far-fetched proposition, even in the most liberal judicial jurisdictions, that these days will likely see them in immigration custody for a very long time as their case winds through the immigration litigation labyrinth.
The determination to pursue such review should be reserved for those who at least have facially legitimate claims and who have real chance of obtaining some sort of relief from removal for having come to America without the proper documents, without documents at all, or for violating the terms of their presence in the U.S. in a manner that placed their immigration status in jeopardy.
All as defined by the statutes debated, promulgated, and passed by Congress and sent to the president that, once signed and in effect as laws, bind the executive branch on what it is required to or has the discretion to do in regard to the immigration issue as it applies to every foreign national.
If those who don’t qualify were to get out of the way, the system would not be so overwhelmed and would likely provide for much more timely due process for those who do.
More importantly, for those who don’t qualify, it would mean that, rather than remain in custody at some facility that they consider less than desirable, they could be free from such custody and go home by merely giving the American government the right to send them there now instead of later.
Activist Democratic politicos, fronted by their activist talking heads who pretend to be journalists, would much better serve those they purport to represent and have sincere concern for by advising them to do that than by criticizing the administration for enforcing the immigration laws that they likely helped pass and/or that they have done nothing to change and criticizing the enforcement procedures that flow from those laws.
Doing the latter serves no one. Not the alien. Not the American people. And certainly not the country that these claimed representatives of the people have taken an oath to support and defend.
Doing the former, serves everyone, including the detained alien who chooses to use the “key to his jail cell” and go home.