AUSTIN, Texas – En años recientes ha incrementado la aplicación de leyes migratorias, y el gobierno federal ha recurrido a instituciones privadas para la detención de inmigrantes indocumentados mientras esperan su fecha de audiencia ante la corte. Por esta razón el sector privado de instituciones de detención no fue afectado por la recesión económica. Un nuevo estudio de la organización Sentencing Project dice que en los últimos diez años el número promedio de inmigrantes detenidos en instituciones públicas incrementó 26%, mientas que el número de inmigrantes detenidos en instituciones privadas incrementó 188%.

Estados que sufren de déficit en su presupuesto, como Texas, han tenido que recortar el número de personas en detención en instituciones pública. Pero agencias federales han ayudado a “tapar el hueco” de estos recortes al incrementar su dependencia en instituciones de detención privadas para inmigrantes esperando su audiencia ante la corte. Cody Mason, autor del reporte y parte de la organización The Sentencing Project comenta.

“Una gran cantidad del incremento en el numero de detenciones es debido a los inmigrantes detenidos. Existe una red extensa de instituciones privadas de detención, no son reguladas apropiadamente, y es difícil saber en que institución o bajo que compañía es en la que se encuentran detenidos los inmigrantes.”

Añade que la mayoría de los centros de detención son compañías privadas. Uno de ellos se inauguró este año en la Ciudad de Karnes. Es un ejemplo del incremento en esfuerzos por parte del Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de Estados Unidos (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) por mantener a menos inmigrantes detenidos en el sistema de prisión del país.

Aunque Mason reconoce que los “centros de detención civiles” son un poco mejor que las prisiones públicas, dice que las prisiones no protegen de manera adecuada los derechos humanos de los inmigrantes que no han sido sentenciados por algún crimen. Pero dice que no existe razón por la cuál esta red de instituciones privadas solo tengan la meta de obtener ganancias.

“Su interés principal es el que se detengan a más individuos – y en verdad no parece estar dando beneficios positivos a las personas que son detenidas, a los contribuyentes, ni a los gobiernos.”

Personas que abogan por apoyo a la privatización dicen que los contratos flexibles ayudan a reducir costos para los contribuyentes. Pero oponentes argumentan que los ahorros son mínimos y provienen de condiciones de trabajo deplorables y salarios injustos a los empleados.

Aquellos que abogan por la comunidad fronteriza temen otro efecto secundario de la privatización: corporaciones cabildeando políticas de inmigración que ayudan a incrementar sus ganancias. Dotty Griffith de la ACLU de Texas dice que este cabildeo podrá influenciar los verdaderos esfuerzos por una reforma migratoria integral.

“Discusiones sobre como la detención de inmigrantes indocumentados debería ser sobre las leyes y no sobre como incrementar ganancias para las instituciones privadas que ganan al mantener a personas bajo detención.”

Se preocupa que el interés público está cambiando de encarcelar a las personas culpables a encarcelar el número adecuado de personas para obtener ganancias. Mason concluye que más transparencia en esfuerzos de cabildeo y financiación de campañas electorales es necesario para revelar la influencia que estas corporaciones tienen en las políticas de detención e inmigración.

El reporte completo: www.sentencingproject.org.


get more stories like this via email

Advocates for immigrants are pushing back on a bill signed by Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds in the last few days of the legislative session, modeled on a recent, controversial Texas law.

Senate File 2340 gives local law enforcement officers and judges the authority to deport undocumented immigrants.

Erica Johnson, executive director of the Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice, argued the bill is an overreach, and said Iowa law enforcement officers are not authorized to enforce it.

"This is a pretty clear intervention into federal territory," Johnson pointed out. "U.S. immigration law is governed by federal law."

Much like the author of the Texas bill, supporters in Iowa blame the Biden administration for failing to slow illegal immigration, so the state has decided to take matters into its own hands.

Johnson contended the bill and other anti-immigrant sentiment during the just-completed legislative session target the very people Iowa, with its dwindling population, will depend on for its future workforce.

"What we need is communities that are safe, where workers have access to dignified, safe workplaces," Johnson emphasized. "The truth of what Iowa's future could be depends on immigrants and immigrant workers in our state, and unfortunately, this law could take us back, away from that possible future. "

Johnson added her organization will pursue legal ways to block the bill from taking effect in July.


get more stories like this via email

The future of Senate Bill 4 is still tangled in court challenges. It's the Texas law that would allow police to arrest people for illegally crossing the border. But groups are speaking out about the impact of "Operation Lone Star" on the youngest migrants. Governor Greg Abbott continues to bus migrant families to other states, many with young children - more than 100,000 families so far.

Robert Sanborn, CEO of Children at Risk, works to improve the quality of life for boys and girls in Texas, and contends the policy has put trauma on top of trauma.

"We never want children to be political pawns. We don't want maximum chaos on the backs of children. We want children to grow up and be assets for our community," he contended.

Sanborn points out that 2.2 million children in Texas are immigrants, and said it would be less stressful for kids if families were not bused in the middle of the night, and if they were allowed to pick their destination.

When immigrants arrive at the border, they are evaluated to determine if they're eligible for asylum.

Beatriz Zavala, clinical coordinator at El Paso-based Humanitarian Outreach for Migrant Emotional Health, or "HOME," said the children in this situation are at higher risk for mental health disorders.

"What is particularly troubling is the profound disregard for the stability and protection these families need. The impact on their mental health is undeniable. These are not just statistics. These are children, real children," she said.

As part of Operation Lone Star, families have been bused to Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. The governor has said the practice is needed to keep the Texas-Mexico border safe.


get more stories like this via email

Legislation in Albany would create the first right to counsel for people in immigration court.

The Access to Representation Act would provide immigrants the right to an attorney in their New York immigration cases, ending the tendency to represent themselves if they cannot afford one.

Estimates show a backlog of more than 330,000 immigration court cases, and fewer than half have attorneys. Studies show without legal counsel, migrants are less likely to remain in the U.S.

Marlene Galaz, director of immigrant rights policy for the New York Immigration Coalition, described what the bill would do.

"It has a six-year ramp-up to start implementing and building infrastructure," Galaz outlined. "Having a pipeline between law schools for law students to go into immigration practice, and getting to nonprofits and so on."

Galaz noted most opposition centers around the $150 million to fund the program but pointed out the total expenditure is less than 1% of the state's $229 billion budget. She added anti-immigrant rhetoric has also damaged support for the bill. Currently, it is in the state Senate Finance Committee.

The New York City Comptroller's office said enacting the bill would benefit the state financially. It could keep about 53,000 people from being deported, which would result in almost $8.5 billion in local, state and federal taxes over the next 30 years.

Galaz emphasized the influx of migrants has saturated the court system, leading to what could have been an avoidable backlog.

"I firmly believe that if these investments had been made when we first asked for them, I believe, like, three years ago, then we wouldn't be struggling," Galaz contended. "We would have had the infrastructure built to address an increase in welcoming our newest neighbors."

A Vera Institute survey showed 93% of New Yorkers across party lines and regions support access to attorneys for all people, including those in immigration court, and government-funded attorneys for them.


get more stories like this via email