Oklahoma City, Okla. — Kelli Stump, the outgoing director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, reflects on a tumultuous year marked by seismic shifts in U.S. immigration policy. Stump has spent 19 years advocating for immigrants and will conclude her leadership of the organization founded nearly eight decades ago that now boasts a membership of 17,000.
The landscape of immigration law shifted dramatically on January 20, when Donald Trump resumed the presidency with aggressive promises to enforce extensive deportation measures. Stump describes the current environment as one of unprecedented challenges, noting a concerning trend away from due process. “These are definitely dark times,” she said, expressing her alarm from her office in downtown Oklahoma City.
Looking back, Stump noted that she could not have anticipated witnessing such blatant disregard for established legal protocols, which she finds alarming. She highlighted her dissatisfaction with the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to expedite deportation without judicial review, stating that it circumvents the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. “People are being removed without a judge ever hearing their case,” she pointed out, emphasizing the implications for all individuals, not just undocumented immigrants.
Stump is particularly troubled by the widespread belief among many Americans that undocumented immigrants forfeit their rights under the law. “I would love to send them back to school,” she remarked, stressing the importance of understanding legal processes and the separation of powers fundamental to governance.
The current immigration court system, she noted, operates under the executive branch rather than the judicial branch, leading to changes in rulings that reflect the administration’s directives. With over 350 immigration judges, Stump observed variations in their adherence to these orders, despite each judge’s oath to uphold the Constitution.
The recent rise in detentions at immigration courts has raised concerns among advocates. Stump mentioned the unusual directive from the immigration appeals board that denies judges the authority to set bail in certain cases, effectively granting that power solely to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This development, which began just weeks ago, has led to increased detentions, particularly among recent arrivals.
Stump pointed out that many of those facing rapid deportation had started their immigration journey through legal channels, such as the CBP One application designed to facilitate lawful entry. “They’ve been told one thing that has suddenly changed, resulting in what I would call misplaced confidence,” she stated, highlighting the legal complexities these individuals now face.
For those seeking asylum, the situation appears dire. Current policies put individuals at risk of expedited deportation unless they can demonstrate “credible fear” for their safety if returned to their home country. The judicial process affords only seven days for an immigration judge to review cases, a timeframe that exacerbates the challenges of navigating the system.
Stump also voiced her concern regarding the treatment of asylum seekers, a foundational element of U.S. immigration policy. She advocated for international oversight, suggesting that the United Nations should hold the U.S. accountable for its obligations to protect those facing persecution.
Despite the grim realities, Stump remains hopeful about the discussions surrounding legal representation for immigrants. “These are very complex cases, and without a lawyer, the likeliness of success diminishes,” she emphasized, encouraging individuals to seek legal assistance in fighting their cases, no matter the circumstances.
As Stump prepares to leave her role, she remains steadfast in her commitment to advocacy, believing that the law can still offer protection to those facing persecution. The struggle for equitable treatment and due process continues, even amidst uncertainty.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.