Justice Department Admonished in Immigration Case

At oral argument Friday, July 24 in Pasadena, Ninth Circuit Judge Kim Wardlaw admonished a United States Department of Justice attorney for citing a recent Los Angeles Times article entitled, “Sex offender accused of assaulting teen was in U.S. illegally, officials say.”

The matter originated as a preliminary injunction issued in Alejanro Rodriguez et al. v Timothy Robbins et al. #CV11-0287 2012 WL7653016 (not reported)(C.D. 2012). There, the ACLU successfully initiated a class action on behalf of persons detained by immigration authorities in southern California. In the original published opinion, the court (Wardlaw) held that “individuals detained in Southern California for six months or longer under…immigration statutes”, are entitled to bond hearings. See Rodriguez v Robbins 715F 3rd 1127,1131-2 (0th Cir. 2013). Judge Wardlaw further emphasized: “Contrary to the Governments rhetoric, this injunction will not flood our streets with fearsome criminals seeking to escape the force of American immigration law. The District Courts narrowly tailored order provides individuals, whose right to be present in the United States remains to be decided, a hearing where decision makers can determine whether they might deserve conditional release from the prison-like setting where they might otherwise languish for months or years on end.” Id. 1146– citing Jackson v Indiana 92 S. Ct. 1845 (1972) (internal punctuation omitted).

However, at last Friday’s oral argument, Department of Justice Attorney Sarah Wilson, for whatever reason, mentioned the Times story concerning a Filipino who was released from immigration custody on bond and then was arrested for sexually assaulting a 14 year old girl.

A basic tenant of appellate work is that attorneys cannot refer to matters outside of the record. And clearly, the L.A. Times story published two days earlier was outside of the record. Thus, it is unclear why a Department of Justice appellate attorney would make such a reference, especially in light of the national controversy recently ignited at the death of Katharine Steinle in San Francisco. Judge Wardlaw, angered by the mention, wondered aloud whether Federal officials had actually leaked the story to the LA Times. Although the government denied the allegations, Judge Wardlaw ominously cautioned: “You may be getting another order to tell us exactly who the source for that story was.”

As the controversy over illegal immigrants committing crimes continues to simmer (learn more about criminal convictions as a basis for immigration consequences, including deportation), some judges and officials have expressed little patience with demagoguery. It is surprising therefore at the least, that a Department of Justice Attorney would mention such a newspaper article to any Federal appellate tribunal.

Recommended Articles

article feature image
SCOTUS Resolves Circuit Split and Rejects 9th Circuit’s More Lenient Cancellation of Removal Standard

SCOTUS clarified that a legal permanent resident alien can be physically in the U.S., commit a criminal offense, and still be inadmissible.

article feature image
Former Informants Are Not Protected Group

Fifth Circuit: Former Informants Are Not Protected Group

article feature image
New Shelters for Surge of Migrant Youths Crossing Border

The Secretary of Health and Human Services has asked the Pentagon to add 5,000 more beds for young people. During last year’s surge of undocumented persons, the military opened emergency shelters to house the migrants at bases in Oxnard, San Antonio and Ft. Sill, Oklahoma.

article feature image
Deported Immigrants with Mental Disabilities

On September 26th, 2015 U.S. District Judge Dolly M. Gee granted final approval of the settlement in Franco v. Holder, paving the way for previously deported immigrants with severe mental disabilities to request to reopen their cases in Immigration Court, and if approved return to the United States.

Attorney Failed to Explain Immigration Consequences | Ninth Circuit

The defense attorney has an affirmative duty to properly advise. It is not enough to say it is a “possibility” under those circumstances.

Michael Harwin

About Michael Harwin

Michael’s skill and experience have been recognized repeatedly. He holds an A-V 5/5 preeminent rating by Martindale Hubbell. He has been named one of the top lawyers in Arizona by Southwest Superlawyers, and one of the best lawyers in Tucson by Tucson Lifestyle Magazine. He also has been named one of the best lawyers in the United States by BestofUS.com , and given the highest rating possible by AVVO, 10/10 Superb. Amazon Books