Border Patrol Accused of Abusing Aliens, Dismissing Amnesty Claims

Accusing the Border Patrol of “criminal misconduct,” a coalition of immigrants’ rights groups Friday accused the patrol of routinely refusing to grant temporary legal status to undocumented foreigners who may be eligible to make amnesty claims under the new immigration law.

Instead, the critics maintained at a press conference here that the patrol has unlawfully imprisoned potential applicants or coerced them into signing documents obliging them to return to their home country, usually Mexico.

“Our clients are being hurt and the people in the country are being abused because of this situation,” said Father Douglas Regin, executive director of Catholic Community Services, which has been helping undocumented immigrants prepare applications for amnesty under the new law.

Discourages Applicants

Moreover, Regin and other critics maintained that what they describe as the patrol’s systematic harassment of undocumented residents has dissuaded many from ever applying for legal residency under the new law. The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, parent body of the Border Patrol, has consistently maintained that it seeks to provide legal status to as many applicants as possible.

“As long as abuse and harassment . . . by the Border Patrol continue, we will continue to see (undocumented immigrants) remain in the shadows,” said David Valladolid, co-chairman of the Coalition for Law & Justice, a Latino rights group.

The group said they were making their complaints public after months of attempting to work out the problems privately with immigration officials. “We have to take our case to the people at this point,” Regin said.

Despite the complaints, Regin said, his group will continue working with immigration authorities in an effort to get legal status for as many undocumented people as possible.

Bill Veal, deputy chief Border Patrol agent in San Diego, denied the allegations, which he characterized as anecdotal.

“I think it’s irresponsible for people to level charges like that without any substantiation to them,” Veal said. “It’s very easy for someone to claim that the Border Patrol is doing all these horrible things and not produce any proof.”

Although the immigrants’ rights groups did describe several instances of alleged abuse, they provided the name of only one purported victim. The critics asserted, however, that there are probably dozens of similar cases throughout San Diego County, which has the largest Border Patrol force in the nation.

At the core of the dispute is a requirement of the new law that undocumented immigrants arrested in the United States be afforded the opportunity to apply for amnesty if they can demonstrate prima facie, or non-frivolous, evidence of eligibility. Federal guidelines allow such applicants to be granted temporary residence permits--and work authorization documents--once they convince authorities of the legitimacy of their claims, swear to their prospective eligibility, and declare their intent to file for amnesty.

The new law generally provides prospective legal status to two broad groups of undocumented immigrants--those who have been living continuously in the United States since Jan. 1, 1982, and laborers who performed at least 90 days of farm work during the one-year period that ended May 1, 1986.

300 Temporary Permits

However, the critics maintain that the Border Patrol has refused to believe that some undocumented people arrested in San Diego may qualify under the law. In some cases, they asserted, Border Patrol agents have even destroyed immigrants’ documentation.

Between December and April, according to Veal of the Border Patrol, the patrol has provided temporary residence permits to about 300 undocumented immigrants who presented prima facie claims for amnesty. During the same period, tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants were returned to Mexico.

As a result of the Border Patrol’s policy, immigrants’ advocates say, many Mexican citizens who might qualify for amnesty have instead signed statements requiring them to return to Mexico. Signing such a document, however, can ultimately harm an immigrant’s chances to obtain amnesty; the law requires under most circumstances that applicants demonstrate that they have resided continuously in the United States.

Border Patrol agents “just don’t believe anything the undocumented people say,” said Marco Antonio Rodriguez, executive director of Centro de Asuntos Migratorios, a nonprofit group that assists undocumented people throughout San Diego County.

Some would-be applicants who have refused to sign the documents requiring them to return home have been sent to immigration detention facilities as far away as San Antonio or El Paso. Critics maintain that their being sent so far away is an example of unfair treatment, but the Border Patrol says that it is strictly a matter of where detention space is available.