Fighting for immigrants targeted by the drug war

Arguing for narrower use of the “crime involving moral turpitude” removal ground

IDP’s decades long litigation campaign recently resulted in precedential decisions by the federal appellate court in the Second Circuit, holding that some New York drug offenses do not fall within the federal definition of a controlled substance offenses or aggravated felony. However, the government has continued to target people with drug distribution offenses, charging them as “crimes involving moral turpitude,” an antiquated term of art which can make a person removable and/or ineligible for status or relief. IDP’s crim-imm litigation fellow, Drew Vaccaro, developed sample briefing for advocates arguing that New York drug distribution offenses are not crimes involving moral turpitude. The briefing can be adapted for use in cases involving other state drug offenses in other circuits.

Defending immigrants with New Jersey drug convictions

IDP recently filed amicus briefs in cases before the Second (Johnson brief and appendix) and Third Circuits (J.W. brief and appendix) in support of immigrant targeted by the drug war. We argue that certain New Jersey convictions do not meet federal standards required to be deemed controlled substance offenses or aggravated felonies. These amicus can be used in Immigration Court and before the Board of Immigration Appeals to preserve challenges for judicial review and could persuade the agency to revisit its precedent in Matter of Laguerre.

IDP is available to provide technical assistance to attorneys litigating these issues. If you are representing a client with conviction for drug related activity before the Board of Immigration Appeals or Second or Third Circuit, reach out to IDP at [email protected].

Smoothing the way for direct appeals of New York criminal cases

Pro se direct appeals and late notices of appeal

In October 2023, the Board of Immigration Appeals issued a precedential decision in Matter of Braithwaite,  holding that New York criminal cases with a pending appeal as a result of a late notice of appeal filing are not final for immigration purposes. Convictions that are not final cannot be used as the basis for removal. In New York, a Notice of Appeal can be filed even if an individual waived their rights as part of a plea agreement.  IDP has created resources to assist community members appealing their New York convictions. These pro se materials explain the process and provide model materials.  

Appeal resources for criminal defense attorneys

Criminal defense attorneys have a professional obligation to their clients to discuss the right to appeal and file the Notice of Appeal when the client requests it. IDP has a resource with information about direct appeals for criminal defense attorneys, including a sample affidavit to ensure assignment of appellate counsel for individuals who are indigent.

Defending Immigrants Affected by Mass Incarceration

IDP’s two day seminar features sessions on a wide range of legal topics essential to representing immigrants with criminal legal system contacts. Registration is now open for both individuals and groups.

Session Highlight: Supreme Court Immigration and Administrative Law Cases in 2024

An expert panel of law professors and scholars will discuss the term’s most important cases, including the “notice to appear” case Niz Chaves v. Garland, the “Chevron” cases Loper Bright and Relentless v. Department of Commerce, and litigation challenging the Texas SB4 law which established a state criminal regime to allow the state to engage in immigration policing and to prosecute, convict, and imprison people based on immigration and citizenship status. Given the shifts in Supreme Court composition over the past several years, community members feel corresponding shifts in issues affecting daily life. For noncitizens who are routinely subjected to scrutiny by federal agencies and are the targets of right wing animus, the Supreme Court has dramatic impact over fundamental rights.

Spotlight on: Sanctuary Policies

Over the past decade, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has increasingly relied on local law enforcement and local government agencies to search for, arrest, and deport New Yorkers. Using the racist criminal legal system to expand the reach of immigration policing has a disproportionate negative impact on immigrant communities of color. IDP has been advocating for inclusive sanctuary policies that disentangle local law enforcement and ICE. Check out our campaigns and resources: