RAICES Bulletin: Expedited Removal Expanded—Again
By RAICES Public Affairs Director Javier Hidalgo, Esq.
TL;DR The D.C. Circuit's decision in Make the Road New York v. Mullin allows ICE to fast-track deportations of non-citizens anywhere in the U.S. This ruling exacerbates community fear and increases the risk of rapid deportation, compelling legal providers like RAICES to adapt workflows and provide critical legal aid to those affected.
WHAT TO KNOW
Issue: The D.C. Circuit's decision in Make the Road New York v. Mullin clears the way for a nationwide expansion of expedited removal. By vacating a previous district court stay that cited due process concerns, the ruling allows ICE to fast-track deportations of non-citizens anywhere in the U.S.. This drastically broadens a policy previously restricted to recent arrivals near border areas.
Rationale: In a 2-1 decision, the court ruled that the expanded guidelines do not violate constitutional due process. The majority determined that the potential wrongful deportation of long-term residents reflects individual officer error rather than a systemic flaw in the policy itself. However, the dissent strongly warned that the system remains "woefully inadequate" for interior enforcement.
RAICES Impact: The decision underscores the steep challenges advocacy groups face against expanded government discretion, and also the importance. RAICES will continue to provide critical legal aid to detained individuals and families facing expedited removal, while advocating against their use and expansion. Anticipating a rise in wrongful detentions, legal providers must remain agile to adapt workflows quickly.
Community Impact: Many non-citizens now face the risk of rapid deportation with little legal recourse, despite living in the U.S. for years or following proper processes. This fear of wrongful detention and family separation creates a chilling effect that deters institutional participation, ultimately putting entire communities at risk.
Related Legal Battles: This case is one of several ongoing legal challenges resisting the expansion of harmful enforcement measures. It follows previous legal battles, including Make the Road N.Y. v. McAleenan and Make the Road N.Y. v. Wolf, which fought similar expansions of executive discretion. Legal advocates are currently evaluating appeal options, including a full D.C. Circuit en banc rehearing or a direct appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Broader Immigration Strategy: This decision furthers an aggressive immigration agenda designed to bypass due process and accountability. The court's narrow reading ignores systemic abuses of discretion regularly observed by RAICES—abuses likely to be fueled by local law enforcement racial profiling. Advocates must continue to highlight the wrongfulness of these policies, inform community members of the importance of carrying documentation, and assist with risk planning.
