Tips and Suggested Questions Ask for a copy of the facility's orientation materials. You may not be allowed to keep a copy, but you may be able to review the handbook and take notes. This will provide an understanding of the facility’s procedures and the detainees” understanding of their rights and responsibilities. Look at which signs are posted, and note where they are placed. Are they easily located and readable? Signs to look for include a legal services providers list, Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) standards, the ICE Detainee Hotline (in ICE facilities), the DHS Oftice of Inspector General, and the ABA and UNHCR phone numbers. Test the phone numbers using the cell phones used by detained individuals to make sure the numbers and key hotlines work (see below for more information about the phones) Ask to see segregation areas, including medical, administrative, and disciplinary. Ask under what circumstances an individual may be segregated, how frequently segregation is used in the facility, and for what duration. , Questions for CBP Agents and Facility Official What forms are individuals required to sign, and are these forms also available in Spanish and other languages? ‘Are families separated before or after processing? How does CBP processing enable separated parents and children to be tracked concurrently? Are parents given their child’s identification number? What is the procedure to file a grievance, and what orientation does a detained individual receive in the grievance process? Is this procedure different for minors? ‘Are children allowed to play with their own toys? Under what circumstances are toys and childcare items confiscated during processing? Questions for ICE and Facility Officials ‘What processes are in place to allow parents to contact their children? What information is provided to parents regarding the location and conditions of the ORR facility in which their child has been placed? How are individuals disciplined? Are privileges ever restricted as a punitive measure? If ‘So, are parents ever restricted from placing calls to their children? Can family members be found using ICE’s Online Detainee Locator System (ODLS)? What is the procedure to file a grievance, and what orientation does a detained individual receive in the grievance process? What countries are represented and in what percentages? What is the average length of stay? How does ICE determine which individuals are placed into detention, as compared to placement in? an alternative to detention or release? What is the bond policy? What is the average bond amount? How does it compare to others detained in [CE custody in that area of responsibility?How many people have received credible fear interviews (CFs)? What is the grant rate for CFls? How many people who passed their CFs have been released on parole, bond or alternatives to detention? How much notice is provided to respondents in advance of a credible fear interview or a hearing, and how do you ensure that attorneys receive sufficient notice of interview and hearing dates and times, How can an individual request a postponement of a CFI or court date in order to obtain legal services? What type of mental and medical health care services are available to detained individuals. Are they contracted or government providers’ Questions for Detainees Where were you apprehended? By whom? How long have you been at this facility? Were you separated from your family? At the point of arrest? During processing? What were you told? Do you have your child’s alien identification number? Have you been transferred here from any other facilities? Have you reported or received treatment for a medical concern? Has your child? Were you satisfied with the response and treatment you received? ‘Are there any personal belongings you are not allowed to keep with you? (© If the staff took any of your items, do you know what they did with them? Did a counselor talk with you? Do you have access to telephones? © Ifyes, are you only allowed to use telephones at certain times? When? © Have you ever lost phone privileges? What happened? Do you have an asylum claim, and were you asked if you have an asylum claim? Have you been told that you'll be prosecuted?Interviewing Detainees If you conduct an interview with a detainee, there are several things you should keep in mind: 1. Respect the survivor. Because detained individuals have often been through traumatic ‘experiences in their home country, during the journey, and upon arrival and being detained, be sensitive to their needs and concerns. This may mean that you will not get answers to all of your questions. Do not force an individual to speak about an experience that he or she does not want to speak about. 2. Be aware of barriers, Language, sociocultural or psychological barriers often exist in interviews. 1. Language: 1, Interpreters familiar with the dialect and culture of the interviewee can make the interviewee more comfortable, 2. When interpreters are not accessible or permitted to accompany you, body language and facial expressions can be critical to overcoming a language barrier. 2. Sociocultural: 1, Be aware that certain cultures look down on talking about certain issues like trauma or sexual abuse. Interviewees may be hesitant to speak about their experiences or show emotion when they do so. Be patient. Remind the interviewee that it is okay to take breaks and that they are not required to talk to you, 2. For interviewees, it may be inappropriate or uncomfortable to talk to an interviewer about certain topics. Women may prefer to have a female interviewer if talking about sexual abuse, and men may prefer to have a male interviewer. 3. Psychological: 1, Be mindful of retraumatization and the effects your questioning may have on the interviewee’s psychological well-being, 2, You may need to rethink or recalibrate questions based on the responses and reactions you get from the interviewee so as to not endanger his or her psychological well-being. 3. Empower the interviewee. Those who are detained feel disempowered because of their loss of liberty. As much as possible, allow interviewees to control the interview, ineluding choosing where to sit in the room to how much they want to share and what they want to talk about. 4, Listen and be mindful. Especially when an interviewee is sharing a story of trauma or violence for the first time, allow the interviewee to speak freely without much questioning, Afterwards, ask clarifying questions or focus the interview on certain topics. Ask the interviewee if he or she wants to pause for water or to take a walk if the interviewee appears to be overwhelmed,WoMEN's REFUGEE « COMMISSION The Flores Settlement & Family Separation at the Border June 15, 2018 ‘Whaat is the Flores Settlement? ‘The 1997 Flores Settlement Agreement (Flores) was the result of over a decade of litigation responding to the U.S. government's detention policy towards an influx of unaccompanied migrant children in the 1980s from Central America. At the time, children were being detained for long periods of time, including with unrelated adults, and in prison-like conditions. The agreement sets national standards regarding the detention, release, and treatment of all — both unaccompanied and accompanied ~ children in immigration detention and underscores the principle of family unity. It requires that: 1). Children be released from custody without delay and preferences release to a parent 2) Where they cannot be released because of significant public safety or flight risk concerns, children must be held in the least restrictive and an appropriate setting; generally, in a non-secure facility licensed by a child welfare entity. ‘Does Flores require family separation? No. Flores sets out requirements on how children who enter U.S. immigration custody should be treated and detained. Flores does not require separation from their parents or legal guardians. Is. le”? Does it create “I No. The Trump administration frequently references Flores as being a “loophole” or creating “loopholes” exploited by migrants. This is not true. The Flores requirement to generally release children is not a loophole; in fact, the entire settlement aims to ensure the appropriate treatment of children. This is consistent with numerous expert findings that itis notin the best interest of children to detain them. il ar? ‘Under the Obama administration, immigration authorities dramatically increased the use of family detention facilities when more families and unaccompanied children began seeking asylum at the U.S. border. These family detention facilities — in Karnes County and Dilley, Texas, and in Berks County, ~ detain children together with their parents but do not comply with Flores requlrements tody for children must look lke. A federal judge ruled that in times of influx or emergencies a ne leeway with timeframe before children must be transferred to an appropriate 19 cannot be promptly reunified. However, the government must not engage ir ‘detention of children. iBecause the government's family detention facilities do not comply with Flores requirements, the government must currently release children from these facilities within 20 days ~ the timeframe generally permitted by the court for their detention in these facilities when the government is experiencing an “influx.” Families released from custody are still n removal proceedings and stil required to present their case before an immigration judge. However, they may do so while living with a sponsor in the community, and in some cases are electronically monitored or placed into another alternative to detention program. If Flores does not permit the I separating them? \n of children in family detention, does that mean it requires No. The Trump administration and many Republicans are presenting a false cholce between detaining children with their parents ~ which Flores generally does not permit in unlicensed and secure facilities ~ and separating them, while pointing to Flores as one justification for this false choice. The administration's current practices of widespread family separation are not required by any law or court settlement. The administration can end this practice immediately. The administration has a third choice that it refuses to acknowledge. Adults and families who present themselves at a port of entry to seek asylum, or who are apprehended between ports of entry, can be placed into removal proceedings without being prosecuted and detained, or in cases where they are first detained, should be released if found to have a credible fear of return. in these cases, the family is still placed into removal proceedings and will be required to appear before an immigration judge to make their asylum or other claim. However, they will be released into the community — together as a family unit —as they await their immigration court hearing. ent ensure that families com; their immi irements? Releasing a family who is seeking asylum means that the family is much more likely to find an immigration attorney as they go through their immigration case, which is critical not only to being able to successfully make an asylum claim, but also helps to support appearance rates, In some cases, the government can also place families into alternative to detention (ATD) programs Unfortunately, the government eliminated one of its most promising and cost-effective ATD programs — the Family Case Management Program (FCMP) — last year, despite the fact that its far more appropriate for families seeking asylum than either detention or separation. However, the government also has other ATO programs, and often relies on more onerous electronic monitoring, for families and individuals it might otherwise detain. These programs are incredibly cost-effective — costing only $4-$5 each day rather than $120 - $300 each day of detention in adult or family detention, respectively. They also have high ‘compliance rates with court hearings, including final court hearings, and with removal, For more information, please contact Katharina a o Obser at katharinao@wrcommission.org or Leah ChavlaUnderstanding the Family Separation Executive Order Donald Trump created a humanitarian crisis when he mandated that children be ripped from their parents” arms to create a deterrent effect on the border. On Wednesday, Trump signed an Executive Order (EO) purporting to end his family separation policy, while simultaneously blaming Congress for that policy. (Diuwiciany ‘The EO does four principal things: 1. It continues the “zero tolerance” policy requiring the prosecution of all adults, including parents, apprehended between ports of entry; It instructs the Secretary of Homeland Security to “maintain custody of alien families during the pendency of any criminal improper entry or immigration proceedings” unless “there is a concem that detention of an alien child with the child’s alien parent would pose a risk to the child’s welfare; 3. It instructs the Secretary of Defense to provide or construct facilities for detaining families; and 4, Itinstructs the Attomey General to go to court to seek modification of the Flores settlement agreement that currently governs and protects children in detention. Whether the EO fully stops family separation remains to be seen. But even if it does, it would do so by instead subjecting families with children to prolonged detention, including on military bases, thus endangering children in a different way. The EO also does nothing to reunite the thousands of families who have already been separated Whether it truly ends family separation remains to be seen: We will have to wait and see whether the EO fully stops family separation. Even before this EO, the Administration claimed that it had no policy of family separation and that it was not separating families at ports of entry—yet the separations happened. And rather than explicitly prohibit family separation—as does the Keep Families Together Act (H.R. 6135)—the EO only instructs DHS to maintain families in prolonged detention. Additionally, the EO’s authority to separate a child when there is “concem” of “a risk to the child’s welfare” is very broad. There is no discussion, for example, about what such a “risk” would entail, whether child welfare experts would be involved in making determinations, or whether parents could contest these determinations. A dangerous proposal for prolonged detention: The EO clearly states Trump’s intent to detain families with children throughout criminal and immigration proceedings—even if such detention will last for months or years, and even if a family poses no danger or flight risk. The answer to family separation is not long-term detention of asylum-secking families on military bases. Instead, the Administration should reinstate the successful ICE Family Case Management Program (FCMP), which Trump discontinued in 2017 with no explanation. According to DHS, then the FCMP was active it successfully secured an ICE check-in rate of 99% and a court appearance tate pf 100% for families. Family detention is simply not necessary to ensure compliance with the law. Eamily detention is detrimental to children: Family detention is not a suitable solution to family separation, ‘The American Academy of Pediatrics and other child welfare experts have wamed that family detention poses serious dangers to children’s health and can result in “lifelong consequences for educational achievement, economic productivity, health status, and longevity.” Children simply do not belong in immigration jail or in detention on military bases. Fails to reunite families: Over 2,000 immigrant children, including infants and toddlers, have been taken from their parents in the past month alone. Such parents are often given little information about the location of their children, and some have been told (incorrectly) that a swift deportation would allow them to reunite faster, Some have even been deported without their child and with no means of reunification. The EO does nothing to reunite ene Parents and others who have already been separated from their children. And news reports indicate that HHS currently has no plans to reunify those children who have already been taken from their parents, PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF RANKING MEMBER JERROLD NADLERCongressional Research Service 2 wall as legislative proposals that would alter the scope of protections for arriving aliens at the border. concluding Table provides an overview of the existing laws governing the detention and removal process for aliens. General Statutory Framework Governing the Removal of Aliens The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) establishes a number of avenues by which various categories of aliens can be denied entry or removed from the United States. Typically, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) seeks to remove an alien found in the interior of the United States, it institutes removal proceedings under INA § 240. These “formal” proceedings are conducted by an immig judge (UJ) within DOJ’s Executive Office for Immigration Review. Aliens are afforded a number of procedural protections in such proceedings. For example, the alien may be represented by counsel at his ‘own expense, potentially apply for relief from removal (such as asylum), present testimony and evidence on his own behalf, and appeal an adverse decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), the highest administrative body responsible for interpreting and applying U.S. immigration laws. Additionally, the alien may, as authorized by statute, seek judicial review of a final order of removal in the judicial circuit in which the removal proceedings were completed. Generally, DHS may (but is not required to) detain an alien while formal removal proceedings are pending, and may release the alien on bond or grant conditional parole as a matter of discretion (however, detention is mandatory if the alien is removable on certain criminal or terrorist-related grounds except in limited circumstances). Expedited Removal ‘The INA sets forth a separate removal process for certain arriving aliens who have not been admitted into the United States; a process that significantly differs from the formal removal proceedings governed by INA § 240. Specifically, INA § 235(b)(1) provides that an alien arriving at the U.S. border or a port of entry may be removed from the United States without a hearing or further review if he lacks valid entry documents or has attempted to procure his admission by fraud or misrepresentation. (Aliens found inadmissible on most other grounds—e.g., because of certain criminal activity—are not subject to expedited removal and will instead be placed in formal removal proceedings.) The expedited removal statute also authorizes ~ but does not require ~ DHS to apply this process to aliens inadmissible on the same grounds who have not been admitted or paroled into the United States by immigration authorities, and who have been physically present in the United States for less than two years. Based on this authority, DHS has implemented expedited removal with respect to the following categories of aliens: (1) arriving aliens seeking entry into the United States; (2) aliens who entered the United States by sea without being admitted or paroled, and who have been in the country less than two years; and ) aliens apprehended within 100 miles of the United States border within 14 days of entering the country, and who have not been admitted or paroled. Unlike in formal removal proceedings, an alien subject to expedited removal has limited procedural protections. The alien has no right to counsel during the expedited removal process, no right to a hearing, and no tight to appeal an adverse ruling to the BIA. Judicial review of an expedited removal order also is ‘limited in scope, Further, the INA provides that an alien “shall be detained” pending expedited removal 5 proceedings. DHS, however, has the discretion to parole an alien undergoing expedited removal for _ “urgent humanitarian reasons” or “significant public benefit,” thereby allowing the alien to temporarily _ enter the United States pending a determination as to whether he should be admitted. In addition, as an. fe to expedited removal, the agency may permit the alien to voluntarily return to his country if he and is able, to depart the United States immediately.Congressional | Research Service SA’ informing the legislative debate since 1914 —_______ An Overview of U.S. Immigration Laws Regulating the Admission and Exclusion of Aliens at the Border Hillel R. Smith Legislative Attorney June 15, 2018 Reports of a “migrant caravan” traveling from Central America to the United States have sparked considerable attention on the treatment of non-U.S. nationals (aliens) without legal immigration status who are arrested at or near the U.S.-Mexico border. The “caravan” comprises aliens primarily from Honduras, many of whom purportedly came to the United States to escape crime and political instability in their native countries. In recent months, there has been a marked increase in the number of apprehensions of aliens at the border seeking to unlawfully enter the country, with roughly three times as many border apprehensions in May 2018 compared to the same time last year. In response to this influx of unauthorized border crossings, President Trump and other administration officials have called for stricter immigration laws and enhanced border security. In addition, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced a “zero tolerance” policy to criminally prosecute aliens who unlawfully enter the United States at the southern border; a policy which has reportedly led to the separation of children from parents awaiting prosecution for unlawful entry. The Administration and its supporters argue that these policies serve as a “tough deterrent” that is necessary to curb illegal border crossings. Opponents of these policies claim that U.S. immigration laws offer inadequate protections for those seeking a “safe haven” in the United States, and some have also legally challenged the separation of families on constitutional grounds. The situation at the border and U.S. immigration authorities’ response to it has prompted significant attention and, in some cases, confusion regarding the governing laws and policies. This Legal Sidebar briefly examines the laws governing the admission and exclusion of aliens at the border, including the procedures for aliens seeking asylum and the circumstances in which arriving aliens may be detained. The Sidebar also addresses special rules concerning the treatment of unaccompanied alien children (UACS), as Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov LSB10150 CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and ‘Committees of Congress,