Thousands of immigrants are in civil detention awaiting case adjudication in the United States. Unguaranteed legal representation and stringent access to bond hearings restrict the chances of release. Though the institutional purpose of civil detention and bonds in Immigration Court is to secure safety and the public good, we find contradictions in such purpose: increasingly high bonds are mandated regardless of individual circumstances, in a context of legal violence, or the loss and uncertainty experienced by a subclass of individuals scrutinized by the law, characterized by heightened criminalization, scarce legal protections, and broad judicial discretion. We use bond case administrative data from the Executive Office of Immigration Review between 1991 and 2020 in a multivariate analysis that centers on the influence of criminal records and legal representation to get lower bond amounts granted. We find that criminal records predict risk before 2001, but after, individuals with no records are also mandated to pay higher amounts to Immigration Courts. After 2001, legal representation’s influence on reducing bond amounts is subtle but relevant. We analyze these findings in light of policy changes and provide evidence on how increasingly high bonds fracture social and economic determinants of immigrants’ well-being by altering their economic stability while they and their communities also suffer the psychological and physical tolls of detention.
AbregoL. (2014). Sacrificing families: Navigating laws, labor, and love across borders. Stanford University Press.
2.
AbregoL.LaRossaR. (2009). Economic well-being in Salvadoran transnational families: How gender affects remittance practices. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(4), 1070–1085.
AlexanderM. (2012). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness (Revised ed.). New Press.
5.
ArmentaA. (2019). Policing and punishing illegality in the United States. In PegueroA.MillerH. V. (Eds.), Routledge Handbook on immigration and crime. Routledge.
6.
AsadA. L. (2019). Deportation decisions: Judicial decision-making in an American Immigration Court. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(9), 1221–1249.
7.
BaiJ.PerronP. (2003). Computation and analysis of multiple structural change models. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.659
Board of Immigration Appeals. (2006). Matter of Guerra, 24 I&N Dec. 37.
10.
BrabeckK.LykesM. B.HunterC. (2014). The psychosocial impact of detention and deportation on U.S. migrant children and families. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 84(5), 496–505.
11.
BrabeckK.XuQ. (2010). The impact of detention and deportation on Latino immigrant children and families: A quantitative exploration. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 32(3), 341–361.
12.
BrothertonD. C.KretsedemasP. (Eds.). (2017). Immigration policy in the age of punishment: Detention, deportation, and border control. Columbia University Press.
13.
ChacónJ. M. (2012). Overcriminalizing immigration. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 102(3), 613–652.
14.
ChavezL. (2001). Covering immigration: Popular images and the politics of the nation. University of California Press.
15.
CookM. (2003). Banished for minor crimes: The aggravated felony provision of the immigration and nationality act as human rights violation note. Boston College Third World Law Journal, 23(2), 293–330.
16.
CreweB. (2022). Beyond deprivations: The pains of imprisonment and the prisoner social system. In CreweB.GoldsmithA.HalseyM. (Eds.), Power and pain in the modern prison: The society of captives revisited. Oxford University Press.
17.
DasA. (2013). Immigration detention: Information gaps and institutional barriers to reform. The University of Chicago Law Review, 80(1), 137–164.
18.
DasA. (2020). No justice in the shadows: How America criminalizes immigrants (1st ed.). Bold Type Books.
19.
De GenovaN. (2004). The legal production of Mexican/migrant “illegality.”Latino Studies, 2(2), 160–185.
20.
DeMatteeA. J.LudsinH.ShresthaG.GerendayG.ThurmanD.StatonJ. K. (2021). Burden and standard shifting in immigration bond decisions (Working paper).
21.
EaglyI.ShaferS. (2015). A national study of access to counsel in immigration court. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 164(1), 1–92.
22.
FIRRP. (2011). All about bonds. Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project.
23.
Fleury-SteinerB.LongazelJ. (2014). The pains of mass imprisonment. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
24.
García HernándezC. C. (2014). Immigration detention as punishment. UCLA Law Review, 61(5), 1346–1414.
25.
García HernándezC. C. (2019). Migrating to prison: America’s obsession with locking up immigrants. The New Press.
26.
GilmanD. (2016). To loose the bonds: The deceptive promise of freedom from pretrial immigration detention. Indiana Law Journal, 92(1), 157–226.
27.
Golash-BozaT. (2016). Immigration nation: Raids, detentions, and deportations in post-9/11 America. Taylor & Francis.
28.
HaggertyK. D.BuceriusS. (2020). The proliferating pains of imprisonment. Incarceration, 1(1), 263266632093643.
29.
HarbeckD. (2016). A new calculus for the measure of mercy: Does the New Jersey bail reform affect the immigration court bond hearings. Rutgers Law Record, 44, 106–117.
30.
HeatonP.MaysonS.StevensonM. (2017). The downstream consequences of misdemeanor pretrial detention. Stanford Law Review, 69, 711–794.
31.
HelliwellJ. F.PutnamR. D. (2005). The social context of well-being. In HuppertF. A.BaylisN.KeverneB. (Eds.), The science of well-being. Oxford University Press.
32.
HiemstraN. (2019). Detain and deport: The chaotic U.S. immigration enforcement regime. The University of Georgia Press.
33.
HolperM. (2016). The beast of burden in immigration bond hearings. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 67(1), 75–134.
34.
ICE. (2023). Detention facilities. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
35.
KalhanA. (2010). Rethinking immigration detention. Columbia Law Review Sidebar, 110, 42–58.
36.
KanstroomD. (2010). Deportation nation: Outsiders in American history. Harvard University Press.
37.
KimC. Y.SemetA. (2019). Presidential ideology and immigrant detention. Duke Law Journal, 69(8), 1855–1903.
38.
KimC. Y.SemetA. (2020). An empirical study of political control over immigration adjudication. The Georgetown Law Journal, 108(579), 579–647.
39.
KoepkeJ. L.RobinsonD. G. (2018). Danger ahead: Risk assessment and the future of bail reform. Washington Law Review, 93(4), 1725–1808.
40.
KramerM. E. (2019). Immigration consequences of criminal activity: A guide to representing foreign-born defendants (8th ed.). American Immigration Lawyers Association.
LongazelJ.BermanJ.Fleury-SteinerB. (2016). The pains of immigrant imprisonment. Sociology Compass, 10(11), 989–998.
43.
Martinez-ArandaM. G. (2023). Precarious legal patchworking: Detained immigrants’ access to justice. Social Problems, 1–16.
44.
MarunaS.DabneyD.TopalliV. (2012). Putting a price on prisoner release: The history of bail and a possible future of parole. Punishment & Society, 14(3), 315–337.
45.
MenjívarC.AbregoL. (2012). Legal violence: Immigration law and the lives of Central American Immigrants. American Journal of Sociology, 117(5), 1380–1421.
46.
MenjívarC.Gómez CervantesA.AlvordD. (2018). The expansion of “crimmigration,” mass detention, and deportation. Sociology Compass, 12(4), e12573.
47.
MuñizA. (2022). Borderland circuitry: Immigration surveillance in the United States and beyond. University of California Press.
48.
NagelI. H. (1983). The legal/extra-legal controversy: Judicial decisions in pretrial release. Law & Society Review, 17(3), 481–515.
NevinsJ. (2010). Operation gatekeeper and beyond: The war on “Illegals” and the remaking of the U.S.—Mexico boundary (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203857731
PatlerC. (2015). The economic impacts of long-term immigration detention in Southern California. UCLA: Institute for Research on Labor and Employment.
55.
PatlerC.Golash-BozaT. M. (2017). The fiscal and human costs of immigrant detention and deportation in the United States. Sociology Compass, 11(11), e12536.
56.
RahmanI. (2019). New York, New York: Highlights of the 2019 bail reform law (p. 20). Vera Institute of Justice.
57.
ReimanJ. H.LeightonP. (2020). The rich get richer and the poor get prison: Thinking critically about class and criminal justice. Taylor & Francis.
58.
RyoE. (2016). Detained: A study of immigration bond hearings: Detained. Law & Society Review, 50(1), 117–153.
59.
RyoE. (2019a). Predicting danger in immigration courts. Law and Social Inquiry, 44(1), 227–256.
60.
RyoE. (2019b). Understanding immigration detention: Causes, conditions, and consequences. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 15(1), 97–115.
61.
SaadiA.De Trinidad YoungM. E.PatlerC.EstradaJ. L.VentersH. (2020). Understanding US immigration detention: Reaffirming rights and addressing social-structural determinants of health. Health and Human Rights Journal, 22(1), 187–198.
SiuicN.SmartN. (2020). Evidence shows that most immigrants appear for immigration court hearings [Fact Sheet]. Vera Insittute of Justice.
64.
StaveJ.MarkowitzP.BerberichK.ChoT.DubbanehD.SimichL.SiulcN.SmartN. (2017). Evaluation of the New York immigrant family unity project: Assessing the impact of legal representation on family and community unity (p. 69). Vera Institute of Justice.
65.
StevensonM. T. (2018). Distortion of justice: How the inability to pay bail affects case outcomes. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 34(4), 511–542.
66.
TaylorM. H. (2004). Dangerous by decree: Detention without bond in immigration proceedings symposium on immigration law and terrorism. Loyola Law Review, 50(1), 149–172.
67.
TolentinoJ. (2020, June11). Where bail funds go from here. The New Yorker.
68.
ToshS. (2022). Mandatory detention for criminal convictions: The reproduction of racial inequality through U.S. immigration law. Law & Policy, 44(1), 70–97.
69.
ToshS. (2023). The immigration law death penalty: Aggravated felonies, deportation, and legal resistance. New York University Press.
ZayasL. H.Aguilar-GaxiolaS.YoonH.ReyG. N. (2015). The distress of citizen-children with detained and deported parents. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(11), 3213–3223.
