Obama Administration releases immigrant detainees

By Richard Kistnen, Esq. –

The news of automatic government spending cuts to take effect at the end of the week has garnered much media attention.  Legislators, in recent days, from both sides of the aisle, have waged an intense media campaign to try and sway public opinion on this issue.  The Obama administration has made a major play that is receiving significant criticism.  It has been reported that federal immigration officials began last week to release hundreds of illegal detainees from immigration detention centers around the country.  The move comes as the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) braces for cuts in its operating budget.
Federal officials supporting the release of detainees argue that it was a necessary move in light of the looming cuts to operating budget ICE faces if the automatic spending cuts go into effect.  The move is designed to reduce ICE’s immediate operating costs to a level sustainable under budget constraints that would exist after the cuts take effect.  Federal officials also indicated that those detainees selected to be released were non-criminals who do not have histories involving serious offenses.  Pro-immigrant groups have applauded the move, suggesting that the current immigration system wastes too much money detaining low-risk offenders.  Moreover, though they believe that it should not have taken a threatened government shutdown to prompt these kinds of moves, the detention system is much better off not keeping low-risk offenders in detention, but rather under much more cost-effective alternatives, such as supervised release.
Critics of the move slam it as unnecessarily endangering the public welfare by releasing criminals into the public.  Moreover, such critics argue that there are few savings to be had by the move, and that it is more of a politically-charged move by the Obama administration.  The New York Times, which reported the story, interviewed Republican House Representative Robert W. Goodlatte of Virginia, who said, “[i]t’s abhorrent that President Obama is releasing criminals into our communities to promote his political agenda on sequestration.”  Republican Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama was quoted as saying, “[w]ith this new action, the administration has further demonstrated that it has no commitment to enforcing the law and cannot be trusted to deliver on any future promises of enforcement.”
Speaking editorially, expect great political theatre if legislators in Washington cannot get to work and pass legislation that would avoid these automatic spending cuts.  As I tend to believe, nonfeasance is just as bad as malfeasance.  If legislation is not passed that controls spending while raising revenue, the federal government would have no choice but to slim down or possibly shut down services.  The unfortunate consequence of this is that judgments will have to be made to determine which causes are more important than others so as to continue receiving funding.  Is our military more important than our education?  Food stamps or Medicaid and Medicare? Veterans services or parks?  These are the questions that, unfortunately, will be answered by the end of the week if legislators in Washington cannot get their respective and collective acts together.  If you would like to speak to an attorney, please contact the Law Office of Richard Kistnen, (718) 738-2324.