PDF: Government memorandum
U.S. prosecutors in Chattanooga said they will not provide detailed documentation explaining why they prosecuted nine illegal immigrants for immigration fraud even though a separate government agency already had labeled them victims of a scheme to exploit their illegal worker status.
In what he called a “bizarre, Alice-in-Wonderland” example of different government agencies acting in “cross purposes” regarding immigration law, U.S. District Judge Harry S. “Sandy” Mattice in early March said he would consider demanding hard proof in the form of memos and other communications that could explain the decision-making process behind the prosecutions if defense attorneys were to allege anything improper.
Judge Mattice refused to sentence some of the nine illegal immigrants, who had pleaded guilty to using fake Social Security cards to gain employment, until he could be assured from defense lawyers that the defendants’ due process rights had not been violated.
In court documents, Assistant U.S. Attorney Gary Humble confirmed that the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice investigated claims that the illegal immigrants’ Tennessee employer had engaged in human trafficking.
But he questioned Judge Mattice’s reaction to the criminal prosecution, pointing to case precedent that states’ judicial inquiries into the DOJ’s decisions to prosecute cases only should be made when there is “clear evidence” of improper conduct.
“The defendants … have been represented by competent counsel and have pleaded guilty to serious felony crimes,” Mr. Humble writes. “There is not even a scintilla of evidence that their clients have been treated differently from similarly situated individuals belonging to other groups.”
As of Friday, no defense lawyers for the illegal immigrants had claimed violations of due process. A new sentencing hearing for the defendants has been set for June 9, but it is unclear how Judge Mattice will rule.
Judge Mattice took issue with the case after finding out the nine defendants had been granted rare “U” visas by the Department of Homeland Security in the wake of an investigation revealing that their former employer, Durrett Cheese Sales Inc. in Winchester, Tenn., had exploited their illegal worker status in 2007.
The “U” visas granted them immunity from being deported for years, while the typical punishment for immigration fraud is deportation.
“Given the facts of the case,” Judge Mattice noted during the hearing in March, “I don’t think it’s possible for anyone to have respect for this country’s immigration laws.”
The defendants all now are plaintiffs in a federal civil lawsuit headed up by the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala., alleging that Durrett Cheese coerced the illegal immigrants into working there, refused to pay them, then reported them to U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement personnel when they complained.
Mr. Humble always has defended the prosecutions of the illegal immigrants, noting that they violated federal immigration law many times before applying for “U” visas and claiming to be victims of their employer.
“It is the view of the United States Attorney’s Office that the defendants were not victims of any qualifying crimes … They have been able to manipulate the system to achieve legal status, despite their illegal entry and the commission of numerous felony crimes,” Mr. Humble stated in court documents.
Continue reading by following these links to related stories:
King: America hardly needs a repeat of amnesty fiasco