Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

If you’ve been waiting for the right time to support our work—that time is now.

Our mission is simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.

But without the support of our readers, this model does not work and we simply won’t survive. It’s that simple.
We must meet our Mid-Year Campaign goal but we need you now.

Please, support independent journalism today.

Join the small group of generous readers who donate, keeping Common Dreams free for millions of people each year. Without your help, we won’t survive.

For Immediate Release

Press Release

US: Rapid Deportation Provides Unchecked Authority

Fast-Track Expansion Risks Migrants’ Rights
WASHINGTON -

A Trump administration plan to speed up deportations by bypassing immigration courts is likely to result in serious harm to migrants and their families, Human Rights Watch said today.

The US Department of Homeland Security plans to publish an administrative rule on July 23, 2019 that would authorize officials to deport noncitizens apprehended anywhere in the United States who cannot immediately prove they have been present continuously in the country for two years or more.

“We already see serious abuses of fast-track deportation authority where it is currently used at the US border,” said Grace Meng, acting deputy US Program director at Human Rights Watch. “This change makes people living in US communities subject to an opaque deportation process with limited judicial review.”

Human Rights Watch has found that US immigration officials’ methods for interviewing migrants in expedited removal procedures are seriously flawed, leading to the rapid return to other countries of people who face harm, contrary to US law and international standards. The new rule could expose thousands more people living in the US to these same flawed procedures, likely separating families through deportation.

US law allows for “expedited removal,” or fast-track deportations, of people who do not indicate an intention to apply for asylum. Currently, regulations authorize this procedure only for people apprehended within 100 miles of the border or at a port of entry who cannot prove they have been in the US for more than 14 days. The new rule would expand this to people arrested anywhere in the US who cannot prove two years of residence.

Once an individual is placed in the expedited removal process, immigration officers have nearly complete discretion to sign and carry out deportation orders with very limited review. The only way a noncitizen subject to removal can make their case in an immigration court is if an immigration officer recognizes them as an asylum seeker.

The US Congress attempted to limit judicial review of decisions made in the context of expedited removal. However, in March, an appeals court in the Ninth Circuit ruled that asylum seekers are entitled under the US Constitution to a federal court review of their expedited removal orders. The new rule expanding the use of fast-track deportations is likely to be challenged.

“Expanding the fast-track procedure to apply anywhere in the US is a recipe for ripping thousands more families apart and devastating communities,” Meng said. “This is a massive and dangerous change.”

###

Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to

'We WILL Fight Back': Outrage, Resolve as Protests Erupt Against SCOTUS Abortion Ruling

Demonstrators took to the streets Friday to defiantly denounce the Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority after it rescinded a constitutional right for the first time in U.S. history.

Brett Wilkins ·


80+ US Prosecutors Vow Not to Be Part of Criminalizing Abortion Care

"Criminalizing and prosecuting individuals who seek or provide abortion care makes a mockery of justice," says a joint statement signed by 84 elected attorneys. "Prosecutors should not be part of that."

Kenny Stancil ·


Progressives Rebuke Dem Leadership as Clyburn Dismisses Death of Roe as 'Anticlimactic'

"The gap between the Democratic leadership, and younger progressives on the question of 'How Bad Is It?' is just enormous."

Julia Conley ·


In 10 Key US Senate Races, Here's How Top Candidates Responded to Roe Ruling

While Republicans unanimously welcomed the Supreme Court's rollback of half a century of reproductive rights, one Democrat said "it's just wrong that my granddaughter will have fewer freedoms than my grandmother did."

Brett Wilkins ·


Sanders Says End Filibuster to Combat 'Outrageous' Supreme Court Assault on Abortion Rights

"If Republicans can end the filibuster to install right-wing judges to overturn Roe v. Wade, Democrats can and must end the filibuster, codify Roe v. Wade, and make abortion legal and safe," said the Vermont senator.

Jake Johnson ·

Common Dreams Logo