The US Government Deported 438,000 People in 2013. 83 Percent Never Got a Hearing.

American Civil Liberties Union

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


The past couple of weeks have been filled with stories of relieved immigrants: Undocumented parents of American citizens, children who arrived in the United States years ago, and other immigrants without papers can step out of the shadows now that Obama has issued an executive action granting relief to 5 million undocumented residents. (Read more details on the president’s plan here.)

But a report released today by the American Civil Liberties Union underscores a troublesome pattern that has received far less attention: Of the 438,421 people deported in 2013, 83 percent received a summary removal, meaning that they were sent to their country of origin by US officials without a hearing. And according to the ACLU’s research, many of these removals were illegal: Asylum seekers, unaccompanied kids, and others who may have qualified for relief routinely have been turned away.

Until the mid-’90s, virtually all immigrants at risk of being deported went through an immigration hearing before a judge. But, partly in response to immigration court backlogs, a 1996 law called the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act changed that, extending the ability to issue deportations to immigration officers—the same people who arrest and detain immigrants. Since 2003, the number of immigrants deported by officers without a trial has tripled; in fiscal year 2013, according to the ACLU, some 363,000 deported individuals “did not have a hearing, never saw an immigration judge, and were deported through cursory administrative processes where the same presiding immigration officer acted as the prosecutor, judge, and jailor.” 

In theory, the current law prevents immigration courts from being completely inundated while also providing safeguards; officers are to ask individuals if they fear for their lives in their home countries and are seeking asylum, and those who do are to be referred to an officer with asylum training. But according to the ACLU’s findings, these protocols aren’t often followed: Of 89 interviewees who received summary removals, only 28 percent were asked in a language they understood if they feared persecution upon returning home. Of those, 40 percent answered “yes” but were still summarily removed. An estimated 95 percent of Mexican unaccompanied children have been turned back before seeing a judge.

The ACLU report also documents stories of immigrants for whom expedited deportation was particularly devastating. Below is an excerpt:

Braulia A. and Hermalinda L. were gang-raped and shot after being deported to Guatemala; Braulia’s son, who joined her in Guatemala after her deportation, was murdered by the same gang that raped and shot her. Nydia R., a transgender woman who actually had asylum status when she was (twice) deported without a hearing, was attacked by men who raped her and tried to cut out her breast implants; she was then kidnapped and sex-trafficked in Mexico. Laura S. told border officials that she was afraid of her abusive ex-partner; her pleas ignored, she was deported and was murdered by him within days of her removal to Mexico.

As Sarah Mehta, an ACLU human rights researcher and an author of the report, put it, “Almost every location that we went to across the northern and southern borders had the same stories: of people not knowing what their rights were when they got deported, given a form to sign that they didn’t understand, often in a language they didn’t know, and essentially pushed across the border. The stories of coercion—of mistreatment, of people being threatened with indefinite detention, of people losing their children—those stories also were not just a one-off.”

No one, the ACLU included, seems to be able to provide a realistic solution to the immigration court backlog; it’s undeniable that if all those requesting asylum were given a trial, the system would be further clogged.

But Obama’s recent executive action makes no mention of eliminating illegal summary removals—in fact, it focuses on continuing the “surge of resources” to the border. According to the White House Press Office, “The President’s actions increase the chances that anyone attempting to cross the border illegally will be caught and sent back.”

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate