ICE Revokes Bonds, Detains after Hearings
Posted Aug 22, 2003

The Connecticut Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association reported on August 14, 2003 that the Hartford, Connecticut Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has begun revoking bonds of foreign nationals after they lose their removal cases before the immigration court. After the merits hearing in removal proceedings in immigration court, those individuals who lose their cases, are immediately taken into detention by ICE, and held until they can be physically removed from the U.S.

Individuals who are put into removal (formerly, deportation) proceedings are, in some instances, allowed to post bonds rather than be detained in ICE custody pending their removal hearings. These bonds generally continue to their departures, in the event that they did not win their cases in immigration court. Merits hearings are held when the foreign nationals have been put into removal proceedings, but claim eligibility for immigration benefits on some legal basis. The court will accept certain applications for immigration relief, consider supporting documentary evidence, and hear witness testimony.

Though ICE headquarters officials have not released a formal statement regarding this "pilot program," DHS employees in Hartford and other parts of the U.S. have indicated their plan to extend this practice nationwide. The information we received was limited to individuals who had been released on bond. It is not clear whether individuals who are in proceedings, but were never detained (therefore, did not require a bond), will be held following unsuccessful merits hearings. Presumably, the reason for this change in policy is that, historically, many people who were ordered removed (or deported), would not actually depart the U.S. at the required time. They would simply disappear to evade removal from the U.S. Prior to September 11, 2001, there were not adequate resources to track and pursue these people if they were not criminals or otherwise regarded as dangerous. The new measure would eliminate the problem and forcibly remove these people soon after their immigration court hearings. Of course, it also prevents them from wrapping up legitimate financial and business matters before being forcibly returned to their respective home countries.

We urge anyone who may be subject to a removal proceeding to obtain qualified and experienced immigration assistance. The attorney should be local to the area, as regular in-person court appearances generally are required for all removal hearings. Although we at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, P.C. do not represent clients in removal proceedings, we recommend that a person research and find the most qualified attorney to assist in such matters. Of course, ideally, no one should put him/herself into the position of facing a removal proceeding. We routinely alert our MurthyBulletin and MurthyDotCom readers to understand immigration issues and to share information with their family members, friends, and colleagues on how to avoid becoming subject to immigration proceedings. Valuable articles such as Reentry Permit Alone Insufficient to Retain GC Status (July 11, 2003), Beware: Serious Immigration Consequences of Shoplifting (June 21, 2002), and Effect of Overstay for Visa Issuance (June 10, 2000), are all available on MurthyDotCom.