Mukasey--Undocumented Immigrants Have No Right to  Effective Assistance of 
Counsel  
Thursday 08 January 2009 
_ยป_ 
(http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/01/mukasey-aliens-have-no-right-to-effective-assistance.html)
 _ 
by: Legal Times_ 
(http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/01/mukasey-aliens-have-no-right-to-effective-assistance.html)
  

Attorney General Michael Mukasey ruled on Wednesday that  aliens do not have 
a right to adequate representation at their hearings. (Photo:  Getty Images)  
 
Attorney General Michael Mukasey ruled Wednesday that  aliens have no 
constitutional right to challenge the outcome of their  deportation hearings 
based on 
their lawyers' mistakes. 
Mukasey's 34-page opinion is binding on the nation's  53 immigration courts 
and the Board of Immigration Appeals, which are overseen  by the Justice 
Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review. 
The ruling dispenses with a 15-year-old precedent,  established in Matter of 
Lozada, that allowed aliens to obtain a new hearing due  to lawyer error. 
While aliens have no Sixth Amendment right to counsel, Lozada  acknowledged 
their 
right to effective assistance under the due process clause of  the Fifth 
Amendment. 
The opinion does not rule out aliens succeeding on a  claims of ineffective 
assistance, but it is expected to sharply reduce their  chances. Immigration 
judges and the BIA will have complete discretion in  assessing the claims, and 
the the opinion raises the standard for prevailing  under them. Aliens must 
show that their attorneys' failings were "egregious" and  that they likely 
affected the outcome of the case. 
"Although the Constitution and the immigration laws  do not entitle an alien 
in removal proceedings to relief for his lawyer's  mistakes, the Department of 
Justice may, as a matter of administrative grace,  reopen removal proceedings 
where an alien shows that he was prejudiced by the  actions of private 
counsel," Mukasey wrote. 
Immigrants rights groups were sharply critical of the  opinion. "There's been 
a longstanding constitutional right recognized by the  agency to obtain a new 
hearing due to counsel error," said Lee Gelernt, deputy  director of the 
ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project. "The attorney general has no  abruptly 
eliminated that constitutional right." 
While aliens may still try to appeal the BIA  decisions to the federal 
appellate courts, Gelernt says he expects most panels  will adhere to Mukasey's 
ruling on constitutional grounds. The ACLU and other  groups intend to lobby 
Congress and the incoming administration to scrap  Mukasey's opinion, Gelernt 
said. 
The attorney general signaled his intent to review  the precedent in August, 
when he ordered the BIA to hand over three recent  opinions that dealt with 
ineffective assistance claims. (Click here for a Legal  Times' previous 
coverage 
of the review.) 
Mukasey, in his opinion, noted that the legal  landscape has changed since 
Lozada was decided in 1988. While several federal  appellate courts, including 
the 1st, 2nd, and 9th circuits, recognize either a  statutory or constitutional 
right to effective assistance for aliens in removal  proceedings, rulings 
from the 4th, 7th, and 8th circuits have rejected the  notion. 
"I conclude, as have a growing number of federal  courts, that the 
Constitution does not confer a constitutional right to  effective assistance of 
counsel 
in removal proceedings," Mukasey wrote. "The  reason is simple: Under Supreme 
Court precedent, there is no constitutional  right to effective assistance of 
counsel under the Due Process Clause or any  other provision where--as here 
and as in most civil proceedings--there is no  constitutional right to counsel, 
including Government-appointed counsel, in the  first place." 
The core of the argument is that due process clause  only guards against 
actions that can be attributed to the government. But aliens  have no 
constitutional right to counsel, unlike criminal defendants, so the  government 
is not 
responsible for the conduct of their privately retained  lawyers. 
More than a dozen organizations and individuals filed  amicus briefs, 
opposing a rollback of Lozada, including the American Civil  Liberties Union, 
the 
National Immigrant Justice Center, the American Immigration  Law Foundation, 
and 
the American Immigration Lawyers Association. The groups  argued that due 
process right to a full and fair hearing on the merits include a  specific 
right 
to effective assistance.

**************New year...new news.  Be the first to know what is making 
headlines. (http://news.aol.com?ncid=emlcntusnews00000002)

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Internet group address: http://groups.google.com/group/ChicagoMayDay

To send e-mail: [email protected]

To unsuscribe: [email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to