Thread by @ReichlinMelnick

Today, thanks to a ton of hard work from @shepherd_kt and others, we @immcouncil filed an administrative complaint about immigration judge practices and behavior in the El Paso Service Process Center—a court with an asylum grant rate so low one judge calls it the "Bye-Bye Place."

https://twitter.com/immcouncil/status/1113433034412437505

Our complaint describes how immigrants in the El Paso SPC face obstacles to getting a fair day in court.

Unfortunately, one of those obstacles is immigration judge conduct. The best example of that is a judge declaring that "Due process is an opportunity, not a privilege."

Another issue we raise in the complaint is the use of problematic "standing orders" in the El Paso SPC immigration court. One of these standing orders is one of the most egregious things I've ever seen as a lawyer; a strict limit of 100 pages on the submission of *evidence.*

The Evidence Standing Order contains three rules which each raise serious due process problems.

1. The 100 page evidence limit;
2. The requirement to submit ALL evidence before a merits hearing is scheduled; and
3. An effective ban on submitting supplemental evidence.

Another problematic standing order in use at the El Paso SPC by at least one judge is a near-complete ban on attorneys appearing telephonically for master calendar hearings.

Attorney say this costs them and their clients thousands of dollars and makes representation difficult.

Another order basically requires individuals seeking asylum to prove they will win asylum to get bond.

The law requires a balancing test to determine if the immigrant is a danger or likely to flee. But judges in the El Paso SPC focus almost entirely on asylum merits.

Problems with how IJs in El Paso grant bond were also raised by @humanrights1st. An IJ said "he determines flight risk not by whether or not the individual will appear [] but by whether they are likely to be successful in their application for relief." humanrightsfirst.org/resource/ailin…

As the @humanrights1st report shows, IJs in the El Paso SPC are happy to tell you that they basically only grant bond if they think someone will win asylum.

Here, an IJ comes right out and says it, leading an asylum-seeker to accept deportation rather than apply for asylum.

We also raised serious concerns about IJ conduct in the El Paso SPC, which include:

- Mocking mentally ill respondents
- Making comments about women which made attorneys uncomfortable
- Saying they would ignore evidence
- Telling a lawyer her client was "going bye-bye."

All of these problems put together make the El Paso SPC one of the harshest courts in the country.

In the last 5 years we have data for, the El Paso SPC had the lowest grant rate in the country. Only 3.84% of asylum applications—31 out of 808—were granted.

If you've made it all the way through this thread, I encourage you all to go read @immcouncil and @AILANational's complaint! Issues like this occur at many courts around the country. But in the El Paso SPC they're a perfect storm.

americanimmigrationcouncil.org/advocacy/el-pa…