In an indication of the extent of the Third World invasion of America, over one million illegal invaders are clogging up the US Immigration Court system, with each individual immigration court judge facing a backlog of nearly 1,900 cases each—meaning that it will take over ten years just to work through the backlog, never mind deal with new cases.
A new report from the American Bar Association (ABA), titled 2019 Update Report: Reforming the Immigration System, warns that there is an says there is an “existential crisis” in the immigration court system which is bringing it to the point of “collapse.”
What this is essence means is that the nonwhite invasion is taking place at such significant numbers that they are overwhelming the legal system just by numbers alone.
“Most of these issues continue to plague the immigration courts, and many have been further exacerbated by destabilizing and disruptive executive branch policies, coupled with crippling Congressional inaction, in the face of increased immigration enforcement,” the report says.
“Crucially, the number of cases pending before the immigration courts (which were about 262,000 cases at the time of the 2010 Report) has increased to unprecedented levels.
“As of December 2018 there were more than 760,000 presently pending cases and an additional 330,000 cases that could be returned to active dockets in short order.”
Without fast changes, the ABA said, the immigration court system will collapse.
“Today the immigration courts are facing an existential crisis. In light of the fundamentally changed nature of the threat to the immigration court system, the overall conclusion … is that the current system is irredeemably dysfunctional and on the brink of collapse,” said the report.
Admitting that the nonwhite invasion is the primary cause of the crisis, the ABA report adds that “Increased immigration from Central American countries since 2010 has also highlighted a shortage of qualified interpreters for noncitizens in removal proceedings . . . This problem is particularly pronounced for noncitizens whose primary language is uncommon or a regional indigenous dialect. We recommend EOIR increase efforts to identify, certify, and expand access to qualified interpreters in immigration proceedings, particularly interpreters for uncommon languages and indigenous regional dialects, so that noncitizens’ due process rights are protected.”
The report went on to say that as of the end of the financial year 2010, “the backlog of cases pending before the immigration courts stood at 262,799 cases nationwide.
“ Since that time, the number of cases pending has nearly tripled to an unprecedented high of 768,257 at the end of FY 2018.89 The backlog of cases has increased every year since 2010, with the greatest increases occurring in the last three years.
“At the time of the 2010 Report, there were 253 immigration judges on the bench. The number of judges has increased since then, but the increase has not kept pace with the size of the backlog, nor actually filled the 484 judge positions funded by Congress.
“As of December 2018, after greatly accelerated hiring, there are still only 415 immigration judges on the bench.92 With a backlog of 768,257 cases (as of the end of FY 2018) this amounts to approximately 1,851 backlog cases per immigration judge, an untenable level.”
Practical experience shows that cases can take years to complete, and the crisis created by the backlog is illustrated by the fact that immigration judges issued only 137,875 decisions in 2016, according to Department of Justice statistics.
At that rate, it will take ten years just to clear the exisitng backlog, never mind deal with new cases.
The ABA is calling for a new and politically independent “Article I” court system similar to the U.S. Tax Court to handle the immigration cases.
Said the ABA: “We recommended the creation of an Article I court system for the entire immigration judiciary as a first preference and the creation of an independent agency in the Executive Branch as a good second option. In either case, the system would include both a trial level and an appellate level tribunal. The specific features of the two approaches would differ primarily with respect to the selection, tenure, and removal of judges.”
All of the ABA’s suggestions are of course nonsense, as almost none of those appearing before the courts should even be in the US in the first place.
The only way to halt the invasion is to announce that there is no sanctuary, no asylum, and to turn back invaders by force at the border. As long as they think that they can get into the US by launching “asylum” appeals and a legal process which allows them freedom of movement inside the US, they will keep coming.