Civil Immigration Detention: When Civil Detention Turns Carceral

Megan Shields Casturo

ABSTRACT

Since the passage of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), there has been an extreme rise in the number of immigrants taken into U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, ICE took over 352,000 immigrants into custody pending removal proceedings or removal after a final order. The growing number of immigrant detainees led ICE to begin contracting with private, for-profit companies to house and care for ICE detainees. As of the end of 2016, 65 percent of all ICE detainees were housed in privately operated facilities. The treatment immigrant detainees face in privately operated detention facilities shows a clear lack of administrative oversight and guidance. While ICE-operated detention facilities are bound to follow all ICE procedures concerning the treatment of detainees, many privately operated detention facilities are not contractually required to follow all ICE medical and oversight standards. Privately operated detention centers consistently fail to provide detainees’ physical and mental health examinations within a reasonable time following their detention. Even when examinations are conducted in a reasonable time, medical personnel frequently misdiagnose or fail to diagnose acute and chronic health conditions.

This Comment discusses the development of the current immigration law regime and how the regime has led to the use of privately operated immigrant detention centers. Additionally, this Comment explores the inadequate medical treatment received by many ICE detainees and how this improper care has led to a substantial number of immigrant deaths. Finally, this Comment recommends that three steps be taken to reform the current immigration laws: first, legislative action should be taken to reduce the types of individuals subject to mandatory detention; second, ICE should discontinue its use of privately operated detention facilities; and third, ICE should properly allocate its resources to adequately care for those remaining in ICE custody.

FULL TEXT