Get Adobe Flash Player to see this content.

About This Video

Immigrant Rights Debate

Title:

Immigrant Rights Debate

Published: Sun, 7 Jun 2009

Description: Obama administration moves to reverse Bush ruling on deportation lawyers

-

Automatically Generated Transcript (may not be 100% accurate)

" Well illegal immigration back in the spotlight this week that the Obama administration is taking steps to reverse the Bush Administration ruling. -- denied immigrants the right to reopen cases they lost because of mistakes that lawyers may. Joining us now is Wasserstein founding partner at the immigration law group. And Dan Stein from fair the federation for American immigration reform welcome to you both tenement. And that an -- what's you public policy while -- was -- reverse. The policy."

" Twenty years has been that if an immigrant can prove that there deportation order was due solely to the lawyer ever. The -- reopen their case and have a judge here the -- by no means was this an automatic do over. That is have been established legal. Presents for twenty years the Bush Administration -- final days in order rescinded this longstanding rule and now they're -- ministries -- simply reestablishing a little fairness to this type of case."

" All right so Dan what problems -- have -- that is that the fact that it would establish some type of constitutional rights for immigrants during a deportation hearings what's your beaten."

" Well -- Obama President Obama campaign on a platform he was going to demonstrate to the American people. That immigration law was being enforced that the deportation process was actually working again. Our Eric -- made this decision no analysis of any kind of how allowing aliens to reopen. Case because of ineffective assistance of counsel Shannon -- do not have a constitutional right to an attorney in a deportation proceeding because it is civil. It is -- it is not a criminal proceeding now the ACLU in the immigration bar. They want every deportation proceeding to be -- basically criminal trial and becomes so cumbersome procedurally. Burdensome and expensive it's really impossible to effectively with twelve million illegal aliens here deport people so what the Bush Administration basically did was say. -- you claim ineffective assistance of counsel to an attorney never had a right to in the first place. Many aliens are represented -- who are not represented in deportation proceedings. Back in May basically make that same motion and and in this case Eric Holder specifically ignored the fact that there's no constitutional right in his decision. He did mention that affected his decision as to what we're going to do is go back to the status quo. Can you give me chaos delay fraud -- deportation delays. There needs to be an assessment of how allowing this motion to reopen will affect fraud delay and hamstring this system before it goes forward."

" Let me get got a chance to respond -- where -- these right come from actually the Supreme Court and the federal courts the past twenty years have been very firm in that immigrants in deportation proceedings. Have a Fifth Amendment right to due process so there's been quite enormous amount of an analysis done over the past twenty years through the court system seven of seven of appeals courts of appeal agreed that -- the Supreme Court. -- me say this this is simply an assertion of fairness into the system. This is not a do over these people don't get to say here. The only people who really benefit from this of those people that would have been able stay here had it not been for their attorneys -- so I think we can all agree that a mother should be separated from your assistant child which is pretty much permanent undo an attorney failed to file some paperwork or missing a deadline. That there has been an enormous amount Nelson has been done to the courts and I think this is just another example of pres Obama showed that he's going to make our immigration system more fair. More functional. So this is simply an issue of fairness this is not going to create any sort of."

" RH ID and very quickly -- wrap us up here mean is this say should we have some compassion in this area or is this going beyond that."

" Look here and everybody wants fairness and every proceeding the US government administers but. The ACLU has a track record for thirty years of challenging every effort to administer enforce the laws in the interior of this country they do not want immigration law enforced in the interior. Every phase at every level of the enforcement process including deportation they immediately attacked the procedure this is in our opinion. An effort to continue to hamstring the process there needs to be an evaluation. -- some kind of a cost benefit analysis to determine how burdensome it is to allow these long term motions to reopen. Free to go on that's why Obama's and is still in the country this systems -- it doesn't work."

" I can dance signing -- Wasserstein we thank you very much for your time today and a great debates gentleman."

More Videos From FOX News

Delayed Decision

Delayed Decision

How will Obama's troop decision impact Afghan strategy?

Video|Sat, 14 Nov 2009|More from Politics
|us troopfound at0:04

Administration officials now say a decision regarding US troop levels in Afghanistan is expected in early December. As the White House continues to weigh the gravity of the decision against conditions on the ground. Joining us now is lieutenant colonel Bob Maginnis and Aaron Miller a public policy fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center. Gentlemen thank you both for joining us Bob let me start with you but could please. A lot of discussion about whether or not we're taking the right approach here. A lot of military officials have given council that we need a certain number of troops in the region the president now seems prepared to pull back
Criminal Act or Act of War?

Criminal Act or Act of War?

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey reacts to plan to try 9/11 suspects in civilian court

Video|Sat, 14 Nov 2009|More from Politics
|attorney generalfound at0:12, 5:59, 6:34, 9:44

And it is set out to take place in New York City. Attorney general Eric Holder announcing that self proclaimed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other suspects. Will they tried just steps away from ground zero where the world trade towers once stood. It's a decision that brings huge legal implications not to mention security concerns. But attorney general holder says he's reviewed all the evidence. And feels certain of -- quote satisfactory. Result so what does a former attorney general think about that. Michael Mukasey was president George W. Bush his last attorney general and also so interestingly isn't -- judge he presided over the trial following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. This is an exclusive interview on Fox News Channel an attorney general Casey is joining us now live in studio. It is very good to see judge thank you for being with us today
will be handled and tried in the military tribunal. As a former attorney general why did Eric Holder the attorney general now. Split these two and give them a different. Protocol in terms of pursuing justice hate to answer a long question with
I don't really see any substantive difference let's talk about sentencing. -- attorney general Eric Holder said in this press conference yesterday that he is confident there will be a satisfactory. Result. He did not saying
The -- and I just have to ask before you go the attorney general made this announcement with the president on its way to an overseas trip is that standard protocol that the attorney general . Can do this in enough himself for. In your experience with the president normally have been by her side.
Unnecessary Risk?

Unnecessary Risk?

Should 9/11 suspects be brought to New York City?

Video|Sat, 14 Nov 2009|More from Politics
|high techfound at4:33

to say not at all I had a tour of an amazingly. High tech . Secure courthouse keep in mind that America for the quote eight year delay was building a courthouse specifically for these defendants and