I think this again highlights my question…

Why hasnt the asylum community-advocates and seekers-do more to help Kamala Harris…

This will not have happened should Kamala win…Why no AILA members campaign with Kamala Harris ? In fact, I cannot recall a single immigration or asylum lawyer campaign with Kamala Harris. This insufficient level of support…in my opinion, strips away the right to be dissatisfied with the consequences of the election…like him firing BIA people

Jamie,

Thanks for your continued participation and input in this platform. I have learnt a lot from you. My question to you here, what has the legal permanent resident and asylum granted (asylees) to do with this article? What situations could take them to the court and you get concerned on the overhauling of the BIA?

Thanks

I wish he had fired all of them so they could experience what it feels like to be helpless and separated from family. Thank you, Mr. President!

Great question Jamie!

Jason please consider answering Jamie in some detail today now that you’ve dropped this bomb on your readers this morning. Thank you 🙏

Further, Immigration judges and BIA members are part of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which falls under the Department of Justice. Since they are not Article III judges with lifetime appointments but rather executive branch employees, the Attorney General, appointed by the President, has broad discretion in hiring and firing them. However, and this is a BIG however, terminating BIA members without following proper procedures, which you hinted at in your article, such as dismissing them before their probation period ends without justification, could be legally challenged.

It is also my understanding that- and I know that I could be wrong- the proposed change of converting immigration judges into special inquiry officers raises legal concerns since it would fundamentally alter immigration court procedures and may violate statutory due process protections. The INA requires removal proceedings to be conducted before an impartial adjudicator with the right to counsel and an appeal process. Removing DHS attorneys from the process and eliminating appeals would significantly reduce procedural protections and could be seen as violating due process under the Fifth Amendment. Based on your article, I did not get the impression that the part to counsel and an appeal process would remain once Stephen Miller and other Trump Nazis have implemented their change to the EOIR.

Your article did not mention much about people with asylum or refugee status and permanent resident status, for example, who found themselves in immigration court. I am therefore wondering if these “inquirers” would also be adjudicating cases regarding LPRs. For, LPRS and asylees (those granted asylum) have stronger due process protections than undocumented individuals because they have lawful status in the U.S. If changes eliminate appeals and legal representation rights, lawful permanent residents could challenge their removals in federal court under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution. And what about these case being appealed to the BIA?

I am therefore of the opinion that eliminating appeals and turning judges into interrogators could be seen as a denial of fundamental fairness- and possibly constitutional rights and violation of immigration laws. There is also a separation of powers issue since restructuring the entire court system unilaterally, despite the fact that president has authority over the immigration court system, could lead to challenges from Congress, which has authority over immigration laws. But would Congress, which the Republicans currently have majority, genuflect to Trump’s illegal and cruel demands? Additionally, if the Executive Office for Immigration Review makes major structural changes without following proper rulemaking procedures, lawsuits could block these changes in federal court. I think our best hope for finding this change unlawful is in the judicial system. Congress is broken at this time.