“This should not be a trap”

From Deborah BrennanCalmness

This story was originally published by CalmattersS Register about their ballots.

When Senator Alex Padila attended the hearing of immigration at the San Diego Federal Court of Justice on Wednesday, there were no confrontations with the federal officers and there were no public arrests of people who visit immigration inspections.

Instead, the visit revealed the confusion related to court proceedings conducted in several languages ​​over virtual platforms against the background of a federal campaign for mass deportations.

The Fas, a member of the US Senior Committee and the Higher Democrat on the Judiciary of Immigration, Citizenship and Border Security, said it wanted to monitor the issues that people were facing in immigration proceedings.

“In this capacity, as part of our Senate supervisory responsibilities, I came to see first -hand what we have heard for months and months,” he told a press conference after the visit. “Not only the stops, the detention, the arrests on the streets through this activity of implementing immigration by this administration, but even people who were in the system coming from periodic inspections, trying to comply with the conditions of their status.”

In May Fast deportations on the track.

This month Law Firm in San Diego Contended Arrest Arrests In a case filed on behalf of two asylum seekers. The complaint alleges that these arrests are unconstitutional and erode the integrity of the asylum process.

There were no such detainees on Wednesday, but Padila said he wanted to make sure that no one had been arrested while following the immigration process.

“Whether people quote, play” play by rules “, they should not be punished for them,” he said. “This should not be a trap.”

Padila made titles in June after entering a press conference in Los Angeles by Minister of Interior Security forcibly removedS

November said he entered the room and interrupted the event, but Padila said that he was present peacefully and correctly identified herself. The videos of the incident illustrate the tension between President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration attacks and the efforts of California’s employees to control the actions of application within the state.

On Wednesday, Fadila pointed out her low appearance at the San Diego court hearing.

“I was sitting quietly from behind,” he said. “I want to make sure that I emphasize that since I did not break, I did not record, it did not interfere with the procedures, and I saw many people who were planned to be in front of the judges today. The judge was not personal. The judge was distant.”

While the judge’s appearance on the video is legal, Padila said, this can limit their ability to observe and communicate with the defendants.

“When a judge is not present in person to be able to read the body language and is distant and virtual, it is also not perfect,” Padila said, adding that immigration courts need more judges to deal with the volume of cases generated by increased ice application.

The first defendant on Wednesday was a young Haitian. Although listening on Wednesday was just a reception procedure that did not cover the essence of its immigration status or case, it included many incorrect communications.

Judge Olga Atia appeared on the screen, presented herself and learned that he needed a Creole translator. The translator also entered remotely, but the poor audio quality made it difficult to follow the discussion.

Atia learned that the defendant had recently moved, so she ordered an indentation while he filled in a change of address.

While he filled this, she called the second defendant, who confirmed that he was talking English and Bengal, but does not need a translator and has no legal representation. It turned out that he recently changed his address and had to fill out the form.

Transferring to the Haitian man, Atia tried to establish the basic details of his residence, educational status and guardianship. But the lawyer who represented him stated that the client was “incomprehensible and non -judicial” and did not return calls. Therefore, he and his co-consultant wanted to withdraw from the case. The defendant said his phone was not working, so he could not receive his lawyer’s calls or messages.

“I guess if I share a few take, this is somehow ineffectiveness of the process, whether it is the need for additional access to a lawyer in person or whether it is the need for translation services,” Padila said.

This article was Originally Published on CalMatters and was reissued under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Noderivatives License.