ICE Shuts Down Program for Asylum-Seekers

From the Atlantic:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will soon close a family case management program for asylum-seekers that, as of April 19, housed more than 630 families. According to Sarah Rodriguez, an ICE spokesperson, the program caters to “special populations, such as pregnant women, nursing mothers, [and] families with very young children.” It is currently considered the least-restrictive alternative for asylum-seekers who come to the U.S. illegally. 

The more common scenario is for immigrants and refugees to be held in prison-like detention centers as they wait for their cases to be heard in the immigration court system. In 2014, the Obama administration chose to expand the number of detention facilities in response to the Central American Refugee Crisis, which prompted tens of thousands of women and children to seek asylum in the U.S. 

These large-scale detention rates continue today, with around 400,000 immigrants being held in detention facilities each year—around 80 times the amount held in 1994. Since January 2016, the program has served asylum-seekers in numerous cities across the U.S., including Chicago, Miami, New York, Los Angeles, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C. 

According to a letter signed by Ann Schlarb, the senior vice president of The GEO Group—the prison company that runs the case management program—99 percent of the program’s participants “successfully attended their court appearances and ICE check-ins.” Schlarb even noted that “families have thrived” under the relaxed conditions. 

With the program scheduled to close on June 20, future asylum-seekers who aren’t held in detention centers are likely to end up in “intensive supervision” programs—a cost-effective alternative to family case management. The AP writes that case management programs cost around $36 a day for one family, while intensive supervision programs cost between $5 and $7 for each individual. 

“By discontinuing [family case management], ICE will save more than $12 million a year—money which can be utilized for other programs which more effectively allow ICE to discharge its enforcement and removal responsibilities," Rodriguez said in a statement. The trade-off, however, is that asylum-seekers will have access to fewer resources and will likely be forced to wear uncomfortable ankle monitors. 

With the Trump administration heavily focused on deporting unauthorized immigrants, intensive supervision programs also offer a more successful record of deportation. While the case management program has deported just 15 of its participant families, intensive supervision programs have deported around 2,200 individuals over the same time period.  

With this track record and budgetary savings in mind, the Trump administration has allotted around $57 million of its 2018 budget for intensive supervision programs. The budget also calls for another $1.5 billion for detaining and deporting unauthorized immigrants.

The Last English Prince comments:

It seems to me that too many of the refugee assistance programs that are up and running are about profiteering from the American tax dollar. These programs are dependent on "refugees" for financial nourishment and sustenance. 

Interesting too, how the lexicon makes every Tom, Dick, and Harry now a "refugee" instead of a mere illegal immigrant. I believe that the POTUS is sending a firm message: 

Don't come, and don't bring your small children as human shields against legal enforcement of our laws. 

Without a border, we have no nation. 

I am pro legal immigration. I am against illegally crossing into our nation. Period. 

One thing to know is The Last English Prince grew up the daughter of Christian Missionaries working in Mexico. She grew up in Mexico. So, with that in mind, she says:

My father never missed the date for leaving Mexico every six months because that was the visa allowance, and then reapplication for visas to enter Mexico again. That made for a very long two day haul from Oaxaca to the border every six months. 

But my father did not violate the law. 

We were also required to carry Sanborne (sp) insurance on our car while traveling in Mexico. Dad paid it. And we were fairly poor missionaries. Lawful. My father is law-abiding.