Detained immigrants win remote access to courts
Judge says detainees housed at Mo Valley must be allowed to address their cases
A federal judge serving with the District Court in Johnstown has ordered the Departments of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement to provide remote access to the New Jersey court system so immigrant detainees housed in the Moshannon Valley Detention Center can resolve their criminal cases.
District Judge Stephanie L. Haines ruled that the constitutional rights of the MVDC residents have been violated because many of the detainees have unresolved criminal offenses in New Jersey but very few options to address their respective cases.
Haines agreed with the American Friends Service Committee, Immigrant Rights Program, that the individuals taken into custody by ICE and detained at MVDC in Clearfield County are essentially cut off from the New Jersey courts due to the refusal of the institution to provide remote hearings.
Moshannon Valley contended it does not have the facilities or equipment to provide remote access to the courts for the 1,200 detainees being held there.
But the judge, in her opinion, responded that the lack of access allows criminal proceedings to remain unresolved, which can:
— Lead to arrest warrants for failure to appear in criminal court
— Cause people who are indigent to miss the initial court appearance in which public defense counsel is appointed
— Prevent people from challenging evidence brought against them and establishing their innocence
— Prevent people from exercising their Confrontation Clause Rights and hearing testimony against them regarding the alleged actions they took
— Prevent people from … entering plea agreements”
— Prevent people that are subject to immigration detention from accepting plea agreements that would not harm their immigration case
— Prevent people from participation in sentencing proceedings in their own case
Moshannon Valley pointed out during a December hearing that they have a process by which detainees can be released from the facility and be transported to New Jersey for court proceedings, but that process had occurred only a few times and requires New Jersey officers to travel the 250 to 300 miles to Moshannon Valley to pick up the defendants — a system which New Jersey officials do not enjoy.
Haines heard testimony and reviewed the stories of several detainees who filed the class action lawsuit, including Josefina Doe, Connor Jerome Welch, Jose Doe, Felipe Normar Martinez and Isabela Doe.
As she explained in her opinion, the immigrants involved were arrested for criminal offenses, and when put on bail and released, ICE took custody of them and committed them to the Moshannon Valley Detention Center.
“ICE assumed sole custody for the detainee and as such it is tasked with ensuring detainee’s constitutional rights are supported,” Haines stated. “ICE cannot rely on New Jersey to transport the detainee as an alternative option to satisfy a detainee’s civil rights, when New Jersey is not legally responsible to do so.”
“The Court understands the individual plaintiffs have suffered these specific deprivations and the harms are not conjecture or hypothetical,” she stated.
Moshannon Valley argued that the criminal problems of detainees are not their concern, noting the criminal offenses are separate from immigration proceedings.
Haines disagreed, arguing that since ICE assumed control of the detainee “ICE must also assume responsibility for a criminally charged detainee’s constitutional rights.
“ICE cannot voluntarily take control over an individual and then say it cannot abide by the laws of the United States as they apply to that individual,” Haines continued.
She concluded, “While the Court sympathizes with the defendants’ (Homeland Security, ICE and MVDC) asserted lack of resources, it cannot be persuaded that a resources issue cannot be overcome in the interest of important constitutional rights of an individual.”
“Courts … must not shrink from their obligation to enforce the constitutional rights of all persons, including prisoners. Accordingly, the Court will grant … the request for a preliminary injunction,” her opinion ended.
The lead attorney for the detainees, Shira Wisotsky, representing the Legal Services of New Jersey, was pleased with Haines’ opinion.
The ruling will halt a policy that prohibited individuals detained at the remote Pennsylvania detention facility from “virtually” appearing at criminal court hearings in New Jersey by barring access to Zoom, Microsoft Teams or the telephone, even though such technology is readily available and routinely used at MVDC for immigration court appearances.
She went on to explain that the District Court recognized that the deprivations result in “consequential harms.”
“This is the first time a court has considered the constitutionality of ICE’s policy denying detained noncitizens virtual access to their state criminal proceedings. MVDC is one of the largest detention facilities in the country, and there are other facilities that also implement this harmful policy and practice,” Wisotsky said.
She also provided a statement from Josefina Doe, the lead plaintiff who was a resident of Moshannon Valley, but who, since filing the lawsuit, has been released from custody.
“This achievement is for all of the women who were with me at Moshannon and who cried because they could not present their cases to the court. And my heart breaks for the women who were already deported, or held too long, without being heard,” Doe said. “I am home today because, due to this lawsuit, I was able to access court for the first time and the charges against me were dismissed at my first appearance. That allowed me to secure a bond and be released. Every single person deserves the same chance.”
“We are grateful to Judge Haines for this important decision on behalf of our clients,” said Alexandra Gonclaves-Pena of the American Friends Service Committee.
Comment from the Department of Justice was not readily available.