Does Trump’s Executive Order affect my criminal case?

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS

On January 25, 2017, President Trump signed two executive orders (EOs) on immigration policy. These orders directed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to enlarge the deportation dragnet and further militarize the southern border of the U.S.  The administration expanded the group of people who will be priorities for deportation, specifically noting “removable” immigrants who have been accused or convicted of committing criminal offenses. The EOs also reflected a focus on having local law enforcement agencies perform the functions of immigration officers through formal agreements and by denying federal funds to “sanctuary jurisdictions” that do not comply with requests to help Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detain and deport immigrants.

Do the EOs change who is legally subject to deportation “removable”?

No. The existing immigration laws dictate who is legally “removable.”  Current law allows the federal government to deport people who lack lawful immigration status (i.e. undocumented people) as well as those with status (e.g. green card holders, refugees, visa holders) who have certain criminal convictions.  The President cannot redefine who is legally “removable” without an act of Congress.  However, for people who are “removable” under existing law, the policies announced can and do expand whom immigration authorities will target for deportation.

Do the EOs change whom ICE will seek to detain and deport?

Yes.  Some individuals who would not have been ICE enforcement priorities before may now be high priorities for removal, even pre-conviction.  Of note, any “removable” person who has been previously accused or convicted of a crime is now a priority for deportation.

Immigration authorities will prioritize deporting the following categories of “removable” people:

• Those with any criminal conviction(s);
• Those with previous criminal charges – even if such charges have not been resolved;
• Those believed by immigration officers to pose a threat to public safety or national security;
• Those who have a final order of removal; and
• Those who have engaged in fraud/misrepresentation in applications to government, or who have “abused” public benefits.

For those currently in the criminal legal system, it is important to note the EO makes no distinction between the types of crime or level of offenses that will make a person a target for deportation.  Also, it is likely ICE will prioritize people with prior convictions regardless of how long ago the conviction occurred or the level of the prior conviction.

Should I bother hiring a good Criminal Defense Attorney?

Yes! The executive orders confirm that immigrants with convictions will be targeted as a top priority for deportation.  It is crucial to not just negotiate dispositions, but fight them to dismissal in order to minimize immigration consequences and exposure to enforcement agents. This applies to immigrants with and without lawful status!   Make sure to hire a Criminal Defense Attorney that understands that any conviction even one that includes a deferred sentencing, probation, and expungement can still make you a priority for deportation.

Am I safe if it is a Municipal case?

No!  Dispositions considered to be minor or even “non-criminal” can make your client a priority or deportation. For example, DHS considers municipal violations to be misdemeanor convictions. It is important to hire a attorney who is well versed in criminal law and understands that the only way to keep you in the United States is to fight your case and have it dismissed.

What does this mean?

Whether you are documented, or are here without papers, it is important that you stay out of the legal system.  Don’t drink and drive, stay away from illegal controlled drugs, walk away from fights, and don’t carry a gun.   But, if you are arrested, your first call is to a highly qualified criminal defense attorney who is not afraid to fight your case, because the only chance you may have to stay in this country is to challenge the charges and get them dismissed.

Brian J. Boeheim, Esq. --- Boeheim | Freeman PLLP --- 918-884-7791

The 14th Amendment Protects Illegal Immigrants

With the Presidential primaries beginning, one of the hot topics is whether  “immigrants without papers” have the protection of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  The 14th Amendment and the U.S. Supreme Court say YES!:

The 14th Amendment, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The key word in this Amendment is the word “person”.  There it is as clear as day right after the term citizens.  This leaves little doubt that the Amendment was clearly meant to include every person living within the jurisdiction.  That means everyone, including those without papers, and the U.S. Supreme Court seems to agree.  In Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) the U.S. Supreme Court said that "due process" of the 14th Amendment applies to all aliens in the United States whose presence maybe or is "unlawful, involuntary or transitory."  Twenty years before Zadvydas, the Supreme Court ruled in Plyler v. Doe (1982) that Texas could not enforce a state law that prohibited children without papers from attending grade schools.  Specifically they said, “no state shall 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' Whatever his status under immigration laws, an alien is a 'person' in any ordinary sense of the term ... the undocumented status of these children does not establish a sufficient rational basis for denying benefits that the state affords other residents.”  In Almeida-Sanchez v. United States (1973) they concluded that all criminal charge-related elements of the Constitution's amendments (the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and the 14th) such as search and seizure, self-incrimination, trial by jury and due process, protect non-citizens, legally or illegally present.

Even as far back as the late 1800’s the U.S. Supreme Court was clear about the rights of immigrants without papers.  In Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886), the court ruled that: States cannot deny equal justice is still under the Constitution.   And, in Wong Win v. United States (1896), the court ruled that all persons within the territory of the United States are entitled to the protection by the 5th and 6th Amendments, even aliens.

In summary, immigrants without papers have the full protection of due process under the U.S. Constitution by way of the word "persons" in the 14th Amendment.