A joint investigation withInvestigative Reporting Workshop

Sec. Napolitano: Time for a “Reality Check” on Immigration

by
Stay tuned for Lost in Detention, our upcoming film on the immigration debate. It airs Oct. 18; check your local listings or watch it online.

In a blunt speech yesterday, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano took on critics of the Obama administration’s immigration policy. At the heart of the issue, she explained, is a tension between enforcing the current law while pushing for comprehensive reform.

“Not surprisingly, our policies have been simultaneously described as engaging in a mean-spirited effort to blindly deport record numbers of illegal immigrants from the country and alternatively as comprehensive amnesty that ignores our responsibility to enforce the immigration laws,” she said.

Napolitano repeatedly blamed Congress for inaction, leaving states “to pass a patchwork of their own laws in an attempt to fill the void,” and she touted the administration’s record deportation numbers, focusing on the deportation of criminals and repeat immigration offenders:

In 2010, ICE removed over 195,000 convicted criminals, more than had ever been previously removed by ICE, and 81,000 more than it removed in FY 2008. For the first time in decades, 50 percent of the aliens removed by ICE had been convicted of a criminal offense. In 2011, ICE will again remove a record number of convicted criminals from our country.

We have achieved similar results with regard to setting priorities for the removal of those termed “non-criminals.” More than two-thirds of those in this category who were removed in 2010 were either recent border crossers or repeat violators.

Napolitano announced that this year’s deportations will “again be at historic levels.” [Just last week, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced it had detained nearly 3,000 illegal immigrants with criminal records.] Anticipating criticism, she explained, “While the overall number of individuals removed will exceed prior years, the composition of that number will have fundamentally changed. It will consist of more convicted criminals, recent border crossers, egregious immigration law violators, and immigration fugitives than ever before.”

Napolitano also addressed the heated controversy over Secure Communities, a post-9/11 program that uses computer technology and local law enforcement to identify illegal immigrants for possible deportation. Critics say it’s actually picking up non-criminals or people who have committed minor crimes (writing a bad check; speeding; driving without a license), and that it’s sowing mistrust among the immigrant population.

In recent months, the administration has issued both a prosecutorial discretion memo [PDF] to help ICE agents prioritize people who to detain and deport, and a promise to review about 300,000 deportation cases to weed out folks who have lived in the U.S. for years without committing crimes.

While acknowledging the program “got off to a bad start,” Napolitano says that this adjusted version of Secure Communities is refined, effective and isn’t going away anytime soon:

Termination of this program would do nothing to decrease the amount of enforcement. It would only weaken public safety, and move the immigration enforcement system back towards the ad hoc approach where non-criminal aliens are more likely to be removed than criminals.

Reactions to the speech varied. Dallas Morning News writer Gabriel Escobar praised her words, calling the speech “the most articulate defense of the administration’s policies.” In states like Massachusetts, where Gov. Deval Patrick [D] has refused to participate in Secure Communities, the speech was largely seen as a strategic counter to the governor’s stance. And in the national political arena, The New York Times’ Julia Preston pointed out that the “strong on enforcement” stance speaks directly to GOP critiques in recent presidential debates.

blog comments powered by Disqus

In order to foster a civil and literate discussion that respects all participants, FRONTLINE has the following guidelines for commentary. By submitting comments here, you are consenting to these rules:

Readers' comments that include profanity, obscenity, personal attacks, harassment, or are defamatory, sexist, racist, violate a third party's right to privacy, or are otherwise inappropriate, will be removed. Entries that are unsigned or are "signed" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. We reserve the right to not post comments that are more than 400 words. We will take steps to block users who repeatedly violate our commenting rules, terms of use, or privacy policies. You are fully responsible for your comments.

SUPPORT PROVIDED BY

FRONTLINE on

ShopPBS
Frontline Journalism Fund

Supporting Investigative Reporting

Funding for FRONTLINE is provided through the support of PBS viewers and by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Major funding for FRONTLINE is provided by John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Additional funding is provided by the Park Foundation, the Ford Foundation, Wyncote Foundation, and the FRONTLINE Journalism Fund with major support from Jon and Jo Ann Hagler on behalf of the Jon L. Hagler Foundation.
PBSCPBMacArthur FoundationPark FoundationFord Foundationwyncote

FRONTLINE   Watch FRONTLINE   About FRONTLINE   Contact FRONTLINE
Privacy Policy   Journalistic Guidelines   PBS Privacy Policy   PBS Terms of Use   Corporate Sponsorship
FRONTLINE is a registered trademark of WGBH Educational Foundation.
Web Site Copyright ©1995-2014 WGBH Educational Foundation
PBS is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.