Imagine receiving a speeding ticket,

considered a minor traffic violation; yet

instead of the simple fine or verbal warning,
the officer decides to scan your fingerprints.
Suddenly, you are waiting weeks for what
was expected to be a few hours in law
enforcement custody without explanation.
Before you know what is happening, an
officer provides you with only two options: a
trial or removal from the United States. You
could have otherwise committed no crime,
had children at home, and even entered
legally into the United States.

CRIME AND
PREJUDICE
How Immigration Law
Enforcement Should Cooperate
Differently with Criminal Justice
Agencies - The Destructive Nature
of Detainers

Overview
Internship
Research Question and
Hypothesis
Key Findings of Research
Product
Future Plans

Internship
Anna Bieganowska
Howard High School
The Greene Law Firm in
Columbia, Maryland
Mr. Jonathan Greene
Experienced:
Immigration Law college classes
Building actual cases with documents
Time in court
The reality of being a lawyer

Guiding Research
Research Question
How can immigration law enforcement
practically prioritize criminal immigrants in a
consistent yet accurate way?
Hypothesis
Holding ICE accountable through notification
requests is expected to significantly increase the
proportion of convicted criminals and security
threats deported as opposed to the prior ICE
detainer-based system.

 ICE only has resources to remove 4% of

unauthorized immigrantsalmost 50% of all
deportees had no criminal violations.

file:///C:/Users/ANDRZEJ/Downloads/pillars-reportinbrief%20(4).pdf

Research
ICE Deportations in FY 2013

http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/349/include/figure1.png

But how do detainers play a role in not

prioritizing criminal immigrants?

Research
United States
Immigration
and Customs
Enforcement
should
remove
detainers in
enforcement.

Detainers disrupt vital

connections between federal
immigration enforcement and
local jails.
Detainers raise constitutional
questions.
Notification requests, which only
notify ICE of an unlawful
immigrant in a localitys custody,
promotes accountability.

Product
Primary Research
Primary document analysis:
memoranda, law, enforcement
Found that notification requests
help enforce criminal priorities
Synthesis paper
Website about immigration law

Conclusion
Immigration is inevitable to the American
Dream, but that dream should apply to the
security of born or legally naturalized
American citizens as well.
Removing detainers will focus enforcement
on criminal immigration to encourage
dreams for those who deserve it.

Future
University of Maryland, College Park
Major: Criminology and Criminal Justice

Prospective Career:
Work for the FBI

https://cbswashington.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/testudio.jpg?w=599&h=349&crop=1

Bibliography
American Immigration Council. A Guide to the Immigration Accountability
Executive Action. N.p.: American Immigration Council, 2012. Special
Report. American Immigration Council. Web. 7 Dec. 2014.
<http://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org>.
Greene, Jonathan S. Personal interview. 18 Nov. 2014.
Miranda-Olivares v. Clackamas County. No. 02317. D. Ore. 11 Apr. 2014. Print.
Shebaya, Sirine. Restoring Trust: How Immigration Detainers In Maryland Undermine
Public Safety Through Unnecessary Enforcement. Baltimore: American
Civil Liberties Union of Maryland, 2013. American Civil Liberties Union.
Web. 23 Nov. 2014. <https://immigrantjustice.org>.
Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. "Secure Communities and
ICE Deportation: A Failed Program?" TRACImmigration. Transactional
Records Access Clearinghouse, 8 Apr. 2014. Web. 5 Nov.
2014. <http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/349/>.
United States. Morton, John. Civil Immigration Enforcement: Priorities for the
Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens. Washington: United
States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 2011. ICE. Web. 23 Oct.
2014. <http://www.ice.gov/>.