Reflecting on the Immigration Court Observation Project
Non-detained master calendar hearing, art by Anita White
The Immigration Court Observation Project draws on the international human rights practice of trial monitoring to identify, bring visibility to, and end systemic human rights violations arising in the context of civil immigration enforcement.
The project brings observers from the public into the Fort Snelling Immigration Court in Minnesota to observe and document immigration hearings. The project launched in 2017 to monitor hearings of people facing deportation while held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention. Today, volunteers observe hearings on the detained, non-detained, and dedicated children's dockets.
Below is a selection of observer reflections highlighting different aspects of immigration court:
"I saw two cases involving bond decisions. What disturbed me about these cases is the judge's willingness to accept evidence that a criminal court has not adjudicated the respondents on. In one case the prosecutor dismissed charges for lack of evidence. In the other case the incident was only a citation with no accompanying report and the detainee didn't receive the citation and denies the allegations (littering and open bottle)... These unproven incidents formed the basis for her (the judge) to decline bond for the detainees...So, it made me wonder; do we not have a standard of "innocent until proven guilty" to guide these decisions? I realize immigration court is not criminal court but is it common for the judge to place weight on evidence in dispute?" -Jeanne R., long term observer
"When the judge asked the attorney how long she needed to prepare for the next hearing, the attorney requested until the end of the next month, but the judge denied that much time. Ironic given the judge's spiel to respondents about how busy immigration attorneys are." - Anonymous Observer
"When the judge asked the attorney how long she needed to prepare for the next hearing, the attorney requested until the end of the next month, but the judge denied that much time. Ironic given the judge's spiel to respondents about how busy immigration attorneys are." - Anonymous Observer
"The judge gave him two weeks to fill out an asylum form and explained the standards. He then started to cry and asked to be deported because he could not stand to be in jail anymore.... The respondent was confused about the proceedings and thought it would work like the criminal court. The confusion of the respondent was unacknowledged. He said he had no money and asked for help at one point. The judge explained each procedural step, but I don't think the respondent was able to entirely absorb her instructions. Witnessing this proceeding makes me wonder if rules and steps are explained to detainees ahead of time. I also am concerned about how much the detainees can process during the hearing - when someone is emotional, it is very difficult to learn and employ logic." -Suni Z., first time observer
You can watch a video featuring interviews with court Observers here.
The Immigration Court Observation Project has produced a number of reports since 2020; the most recent, an Issue Brief on Unaccompanied Children, was released in October 2023. The issue brief highlights how the current system fails to ensure due process for unaccompanied children in removal proceedings and leaves judges to adjudicate high-stakes cases, replete with trauma, for children who cannot be held legally responsible for their actions in any other setting and makes recommendations for child centered practices.
Interested in how you can get involved? Click here.
