Crimmigration Commentary on Proposed Bill

University of Denver Law Professor César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández has summarized and analyzed some of the most important components of the proposed bill with respect to immigration consequences of criminal convictions and removal proceedings. There are many crimmigration changes proposed in the bill, but one critical one that would impact many, is the possibility of appointed counsel in removal proceedings (or deportation court).

Often a lawful permanent resident finds themself fighting deportation because of an old criminal conviction, or even just an arrest or criminal conduct. Unlike criminal law, noncitizens facing deportation, a consequence the Supreme Court has recognized as akin to permanent banishment in some cases, are not entitled to counsel paid for by the government. For those who cannot afford an immigration lawyer or find pro bono/free help via nonprofit, the chances of success and avoiding deportation decrease exponentially. As García Hernández emphasizes, the proposal to allow government appointed counsel in removal proceedings is longer overdue and would be a game changer. While some limited categories of individuals sometimes can obtain government appointed counsel, the INA does not recognize that right for the vast majority of people fighting deportation.