WASHINGTON (CN) — Refugees from around the world who presented themselves at the border and passed their initial “credible fear” interviews sued Immigration and Customs Enforcement this week for putting them into prisons, where they have languished for as long as 20 months.
The five plaintiffs say they have been imprisoned without due process because of de facto policies meant to deter victims of persecution from seeking political asylum in the United States.
The five plaintiffs, whose average age is 28, come from Guatemala, Honduras, Ghana, Sierra Leone and Guinea. All are imprisoned in Texas, three at the Port Isabel Detention Center, one in Laredo and one in Pearsall. The oldest, Sadat Ibrahim, 31, of Ghana, has been imprisoned for 20 months.
As a signatory on the U.N. Convention on the Status of Refugees, the United States adopted laws, codified in the Refugee Act of 1980, to provide a safe haven for people fleeing imminent threats in their homelands. People fleeing persecution may apply for asylum at a port of entry, and are to be immediately referred to an asylum officer for a preliminary credible fear interview. All five plaintiffs say they were found to have credible fear of persecution, but were imprisoned anyway.
Aracely Rodriguez fled Guatemala in 2016 with her 8-year-old daughter. The vehicle heading north overturned in northern Mexico, killing her child seriously injuring Rodriguez. When was released from hospital, in pain and using a walker, she crossed the international bridge connecting Reynosa, Mexico and Hidalgo, Texas.
She requested asylum at the border, but officials refused to process her and told her to leave, according to the Sept. 26 complaint. She was immediately kidnapped when she reached the Mexican side of the bridge.
In February this year, she made her way across the international bridge again, accompanied by human rights monitors and attorneys. This time, she was promptly processed when she requested asylum, and officials promised she would be interviewed to determine whether she was eligible for parole.
Instead, her request for parole was denied without any interview. She has no criminal history and she entered the country legally, yet has imprisoned at Port Isabel for seven months.
Represented by attorneys with Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, the plaintiffs say “defendants intend for their actions to serve as a deterrent to asylum seekers by forcing them to either endure prolonged detention or risk the grave perils involved in unlawful entries.”
“This miscarriage of justice occurs despite official agency policy favoring the grant of parole to [U.S. Port of Entry] asylum seekers who do not pose a flight risk or danger to the community. The release of such persons is deemed to be in the public interest,” the complaint states.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement was known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service until the reorganization under President George W. Bush that created the lead defendant in this case, the Department of Homeland Security. The INS and ICE have used wildly varying policies of enforcement, often simultaneously in different areas of the border and inland United States.
In 2009, ICE issued a directive instructing its officers to grant parole to any asylum seeker who established his or her identity and did not present a flight risk or danger to the community.