Videoconferencing in Removal Hearings: A Case Study of the ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

.soou~SWn~l!~ n~ JSOWI~ u! SNI ~tp UO UO!JU~J~p JO AJnp ~tp s~sodw! ~rnII Aq p~pU~W~ ~ VNI ~qJ '8661 '61~qOPO UOHl1U!LW~J~~lI ApOJSnJ 11 ~sn OJ qS!M. Al1W nOA 'uoHdo Ul1 sv '9 'l~Jdl1q=> S!qJ U! p~Ju~s~d S~S11=> PUl1 SlOpl1J ~qJ UO p~S11q p~tnJ!S~P ~Al1q nOA ~l1qJ ~l!l1UUO9S~no -S}q8!l Ie~dde)o s~H.led 8U!S!Ape 'I-'}IIOH uuod UO .l~p.lO .lnOA p.lO:>~J pue UO!S!:>~p JnOA J~pU~'}I "l °I!RW Aq ~!1.1Rd UO JepJo eqt eAJeS pUR seJnpe~oJd IR!lt-tSOd JRI~eJ MOllO.!:! °8 SilIDnI 'lV3ddV os WnpUeJOW~W U~U!lA\ e ~:>Jew nOA Jetp ~J!nb~J S! J! 'u~:>JeJ S! Ie~de ue JI "I IeJo JnOA JO .sIe~ddv uO!teJ.8!wWI JO pJeog ~qJ Aq M.~!A~J JOJ UO!S!::>~p .IEaddE puoq E JOJ paJ!nbaJ S! aaJ oN 'Z
x!puaddv
Page 1 and 2:
Videoconferencing in Removal Hearin
Page 3 and 4:
CONTENTS Organizations 3 Acknowledg
Page 5 and 6:
Lisa Colpoys Executive Director Ill
Page 7 and 8:
informed of what had happened only
Page 9 and 10:
• Nearly 30% of those who had an
Page 11 and 12:
Videoconferencing is increasingly b
Page 13 and 14:
observations with respect to catego
Page 15 and 16:
PART ONE An Overview of Court Video
Page 17 and 18:
does not consider to be “punishme
Page 19 and 20:
angles or screen size will distort
Page 21 and 22:
PART TWO The Chicago Immigration Co
Page 23 and 24:
Immigration law is arcane, often de
Page 25 and 26:
At the Master Calendar hearing, the
Page 27 and 28:
judge, printing and delivering noti
Page 29 and 30:
conclusion of the hearing, when the
Page 31 and 32: Observed Hearings Staff at the Lega
Page 33 and 34: The results from these monitoring s
Page 35 and 36: In total, we conducted two intervie
Page 37 and 38: Observers witnessed problems caused
Page 39 and 40: Technical Problems at the Detention
Page 41 and 42: egularly witnessed attorneys and cl
Page 43 and 44: Table 4.2: Use of Interpreter and F
Page 45 and 46: The interpreter was located in the
Page 47 and 48: were likely to feel more emotionall
Page 49 and 50: Graph 4.1: Rate of Removal among de
Page 51 and 52: PART FIVE Recommendations Downtown
Page 53 and 54: held in one jurisdiction and the co
Page 55 and 56: • EOIR should issue regulations b
Page 57 and 58: listens to the judge and non-Englis
Page 59 and 60: In other administrative hearings, s
Page 61 and 62: CONCLUSION Mandatory detention and
Page 63 and 64: Inadmissibility Grounds: The provis
Page 65 and 66: I 3lqu.L sJu8~~!mmI JO U!~!~O JO sa
Page 67 and 68: x!puaddv H
Page 69 and 70: (JlA) ~U!~U~J~Juo~-~I~l O~P!A o~!lI
Page 71 and 72: °L .8 "6 aJoN) i.sIR!.IaJRW asaqJ
Page 73 and 74: x!puaddv :)
Page 75 and 76: OJ or ~U!AI~lJO pe~tsu! WOOl ~u!le~
Page 77 and 78: .z PUOH/Ap1 PUOWApotsn;) "~uoqcbl~
Page 79 and 80: 'I °2 'pJO:>aJ ~tp JOj suogeInd!}s
Page 81: '~dOpAU~ ~dB1 ~qJ U! s~dB1 He 3umnd
Page 85 and 86: NOI.L30aOmNI '1 ,{.n~ss~~u ~ ARw JR
Page 87 and 88: .~ NOISO1:::>NO:::> "AI UJJOjU! }SO
Page 89 and 90: (~weN) :]0 J~uew ~1p UI JOj hl~IOS
Page 91 and 92: (~weN) :Jo J~uew ~q} °1 '::>S\!~ ~
Page 93 and 94: ,nIflOSSIW AJJ3 SVSNV)J : NOll. V30
Page 95 and 96: :NOI.LdV::> DN.I.t\\OTIOd 3Hl. 3l.V
Page 97 and 98: VO9O9 S!OUHII 'oge::>!\{:::> 'pAm u
Page 99 and 100: 86EB-LtE ('ZIE) :.19qUmN P'U!G s.J9
Page 101 and 102: x!puaddv ~
Page 103 and 104: . . . . . . .~Aoqe p::»{~~q~ S.J::
Page 105 and 106: . h\~~}U! JO u0ge~ol pue ~}ea .""'n
show all

Videoconferencing in Removal Hearings: A Case Study of the ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?