Immigration Prosecutions for June 2007

Number Latest Month 3,410
Percent Change from previous month -8.5
Percent Change from 1 year ago 12.2
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Including Magistrate Court) 142.3
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Excluding Magistrate Court) 18.9

Table 1: Criminal Immigration Prosecutions

The latest available data from the Justice Department show that during June 2007 the government reported 3410 new immigration prosecutions. According to the case-by-case information analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), this number is down 8.5% over the previous month.

The comparisons of the number of defendants charged with immigration-related offenses are based on case-by-case information obtained by TRAC under the Freedom of Information Act from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys. (See Table 1)

When monthly 2007 prosecutions of this type are compared with those of the same period in the previous year, the number of filings was up (12.2 percent). Prosecutions over the past year are still much higher than they were five years ago. Overall, the data show that prosecutions of this type are up 142.3 percent from levels reported in 2002.

The substantial growth in these cases is partly related to increases in the matters filed in U.S. Magistrate Courts. If magistrate cases are excluded and only Federal District Court cases are counted, the overall increase in immigration prosecutions is 18.9 percent instead of 142.3 percent. The evidence suggests that part of the difference may be the result of improvements in the recording of the magistrate cases by the Justice Department.

FYMONDT: Jan2001
_FREQ_: 1,261 FYMONDT: Feb2001
_FREQ_: 1,259 FYMONDT: Mar2001
_FREQ_: 1,591 FYMONDT: Apr2001
_FREQ_: 1,431 FYMONDT: May2001
_FREQ_: 1,534 FYMONDT: Jun2001
_FREQ_: 1,375 FYMONDT: Jul2001
_FREQ_: 1,426 FYMONDT: Aug2001
_FREQ_: 1,473 FYMONDT: Sep2001
_FREQ_: 1,257 FYMONDT: Oct2001
_FREQ_: 1,343 FYMONDT: Nov2001
_FREQ_: 1,098 FYMONDT: Dec2001
_FREQ_: 1,056 FYMONDT: Jan2002
_FREQ_: 1,053 FYMONDT: Feb2002
_FREQ_: 1,239 FYMONDT: Mar2002
_FREQ_: 1,396 FYMONDT: Apr2002
_FREQ_: 1,672 FYMONDT: May2002
_FREQ_: 1,687 FYMONDT: Jun2002
_FREQ_: 1,530 FYMONDT: Jul2002
_FREQ_: 1,590 FYMONDT: Aug2002
_FREQ_: 1,746 FYMONDT: Sep2002
_FREQ_: 1,603 FYMONDT: Oct2002
_FREQ_: 1,777 FYMONDT: Nov2002
_FREQ_: 1,606 FYMONDT: Dec2002
_FREQ_: 1,611 FYMONDT: Jan2003
_FREQ_: 1,595 FYMONDT: Feb2003
_FREQ_: 1,803 FYMONDT: Mar2003
_FREQ_: 1,953 FYMONDT: Apr2003
_FREQ_: 1,657 FYMONDT: May2003
_FREQ_: 1,851 FYMONDT: Jun2003
_FREQ_: 1,631 FYMONDT: Jul2003
_FREQ_: 1,800 FYMONDT: Aug2003
_FREQ_: 1,705 FYMONDT: Sep2003
_FREQ_: 1,684 FYMONDT: Oct2003
_FREQ_: 1,834 FYMONDT: Nov2003
_FREQ_: 1,631 FYMONDT: Dec2003
_FREQ_: 3,230 FYMONDT: Jan2004
_FREQ_: 2,868 FYMONDT: Feb2004
_FREQ_: 2,541 FYMONDT: Mar2004
_FREQ_: 3,535 FYMONDT: Apr2004
_FREQ_: 3,997 FYMONDT: May2004
_FREQ_: 3,786 FYMONDT: Jun2004
_FREQ_: 3,436 FYMONDT: Jul2004
_FREQ_: 3,151 FYMONDT: Aug2004
_FREQ_: 4,041 FYMONDT: Sep2004
_FREQ_: 3,804 FYMONDT: Oct2004
_FREQ_: 2,410 FYMONDT: Nov2004
_FREQ_: 2,453 FYMONDT: Dec2004
_FREQ_: 2,601 FYMONDT: Jan2005
_FREQ_: 2,123 FYMONDT: Feb2005
_FREQ_: 2,432 FYMONDT: Mar2005
_FREQ_: 3,100 FYMONDT: Apr2005
_FREQ_: 3,029 FYMONDT: May2005
_FREQ_: 3,647 FYMONDT: Jun2005
_FREQ_: 4,016 FYMONDT: Jul2005
_FREQ_: 3,649 FYMONDT: Aug2005
_FREQ_: 3,698 FYMONDT: Sep2005
_FREQ_: 4,425 FYMONDT: Oct2005
_FREQ_: 3,121 FYMONDT: Nov2005
_FREQ_: 2,786 FYMONDT: Dec2005
_FREQ_: 2,600 FYMONDT: Jan2006
_FREQ_: 3,023 FYMONDT: Feb2006
_FREQ_: 2,908 FYMONDT: Mar2006
_FREQ_: 3,305 FYMONDT: Apr2006
_FREQ_: 2,755 FYMONDT: May2006
_FREQ_: 3,184 FYMONDT: Jun2006
_FREQ_: 3,346 FYMONDT: Jul2006
_FREQ_: 3,023 FYMONDT: Aug2006
_FREQ_: 3,148 FYMONDT: Sep2006
_FREQ_: 2,845 FYMONDT: Oct2006
_FREQ_: 2,719 FYMONDT: Nov2006
_FREQ_: 2,638 FYMONDT: Dec2006
_FREQ_: 2,367 FYMONDT: Jan2007
_FREQ_: 3,206 FYMONDT: Feb2007
_FREQ_: 3,117 FYMONDT: Mar2007
_FREQ_: 3,657 FYMONDT: Apr2007
_FREQ_: 3,664 FYMONDT: May2007
_FREQ_: 3,728 FYMONDT: Jun2007
_FREQ_: 3,410 FYMONDT: Jun2001
moveave: 1408.5 FYMONDT: Jul2001
moveave: 1436 FYMONDT: Aug2001
moveave: 1471.6666667 FYMONDT: Sep2001
moveave: 1416 FYMONDT: Oct2001
moveave: 1401.3333333 FYMONDT: Nov2001
moveave: 1328.6666667 FYMONDT: Dec2001
moveave: 1275.5 FYMONDT: Jan2002
moveave: 1213.3333333 FYMONDT: Feb2002
moveave: 1174.3333333 FYMONDT: Mar2002
moveave: 1197.5 FYMONDT: Apr2002
moveave: 1252.3333333 FYMONDT: May2002
moveave: 1350.5 FYMONDT: Jun2002
moveave: 1429.5 FYMONDT: Jul2002
moveave: 1519 FYMONDT: Aug2002
moveave: 1603.5 FYMONDT: Sep2002
moveave: 1638 FYMONDT: Oct2002
moveave: 1655.5 FYMONDT: Nov2002
moveave: 1642 FYMONDT: Dec2002
moveave: 1655.5 FYMONDT: Jan2003
moveave: 1656.3333333 FYMONDT: Feb2003
moveave: 1665.8333333 FYMONDT: Mar2003
moveave: 1724.1666667 FYMONDT: Apr2003
moveave: 1704.1666667 FYMONDT: May2003
moveave: 1745 FYMONDT: Jun2003
moveave: 1748.3333333 FYMONDT: Jul2003
moveave: 1782.5 FYMONDT: Aug2003
moveave: 1766.1666667 FYMONDT: Sep2003
moveave: 1721.3333333 FYMONDT: Oct2003
moveave: 1750.8333333 FYMONDT: Nov2003
moveave: 1714.1666667 FYMONDT: Dec2003
moveave: 1980.6666667 FYMONDT: Jan2004
moveave: 2158.6666667 FYMONDT: Feb2004
moveave: 2298 FYMONDT: Mar2004
moveave: 2606.5 FYMONDT: Apr2004
moveave: 2967 FYMONDT: May2004
moveave: 3326.1666667 FYMONDT: Jun2004
moveave: 3360.5 FYMONDT: Jul2004
moveave: 3407.6666667 FYMONDT: Aug2004
moveave: 3657.6666667 FYMONDT: Sep2004
moveave: 3702.5 FYMONDT: Oct2004
moveave: 3438 FYMONDT: Nov2004
moveave: 3215.8333333 FYMONDT: Dec2004
moveave: 3076.6666667 FYMONDT: Jan2005
moveave: 2905.3333333 FYMONDT: Feb2005
moveave: 2637.1666667 FYMONDT: Mar2005
moveave: 2519.8333333 FYMONDT: Apr2005
moveave: 2623 FYMONDT: May2005
moveave: 2822 FYMONDT: Jun2005
moveave: 3057.8333333 FYMONDT: Jul2005
moveave: 3312.1666667 FYMONDT: Aug2005
moveave: 3523.1666667 FYMONDT: Sep2005
moveave: 3744 FYMONDT: Oct2005
moveave: 3759.3333333 FYMONDT: Nov2005
moveave: 3615.8333333 FYMONDT: Dec2005
moveave: 3379.8333333 FYMONDT: Jan2006
moveave: 3275.5 FYMONDT: Feb2006
moveave: 3143.8333333 FYMONDT: Mar2006
moveave: 2957.1666667 FYMONDT: Apr2006
moveave: 2896.1666667 FYMONDT: May2006
moveave: 2962.5 FYMONDT: Jun2006
moveave: 3086.8333333 FYMONDT: Jul2006
moveave: 3086.8333333 FYMONDT: Aug2006
moveave: 3126.8333333 FYMONDT: Sep2006
moveave: 3050.1666667 FYMONDT: Oct2006
moveave: 3044.1666667 FYMONDT: Nov2006
moveave: 2953.1666667 FYMONDT: Dec2006
moveave: 2790 FYMONDT: Jan2007
moveave: 2820.5 FYMONDT: Feb2007
moveave: 2815.3333333 FYMONDT: Mar2007
moveave: 2950.6666667 FYMONDT: Apr2007
moveave: 3108.1666667 FYMONDT: May2007
moveave: 3289.8333333 FYMONDT: Jun2007
moveave: 3463.6666667
Plot of moveave * FYMONDT

Figure 1: Criminal Immigration Prosecutions over the last five years

The increase from the levels five years ago in immigration prosecutions for these matters is shown more clearly in Figure 1. The vertical bars in Figure 1 represent the number of immigration prosecutions of this type recorded on a month-to-month basis. The superimposed line on the bars plots the six-month moving average so that natural fluctuations are smoothed out. The one and five-year rates of change in Table 1 and in the sections that follow are all based upon this six-month moving average. To view trends year-by-year rather than month-by-month, see TRAC's annual report series for a broader picture.

agenrevgrp: State Dep
percentage: 0%  (0.44%) agenrevgrp: State Dep
percentage: 0%  (0.44%) agenrevgrp: State Dep
percentage: 0%  (0.44%) agenrevgrp: State Dep
percentage: 0%  (0.44%) agenrevgrp: State Dep
percentage: 0%  (0.44%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 0%  (0.29%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 0%  (0.29%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 0%  (0.29%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 0%  (0.29%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 0%  (0.29%) agenrevgrp: Justice Other
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: Justice Other
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: Justice Other
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: Justice Other
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: Justice Other
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 0%  (0.18%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 0%  (0.18%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 0%  (0.18%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 0%  (0.18%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 0%  (0.18%) agenrevgrp: Defense
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: Defense
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: Defense
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: Defense
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: Defense
percentage: 0%  (0.12%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 99%  (98.86%)
PIE3D chart of agenrevgrp

Figure 2: Prosecutions by Investigative Agency

Virtually all federal criminal prosecutions for immigration offenses in June 2007 (99 percent) were referred by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).  The two lead investigative agencies in DHS are Customs and Border Protection (CBP) whose border patrol agencies guard the county's borders, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), responsible for conducting most immigration criminal  investigations under the immigration laws. See Figure 2.

Immigration Prosecutions in U.S. Magistrate Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

In June 2007, 76 percent of immigration cases for these matters took place in U.S. Magistrate Courts which handle less serious misdemeanor cases, including what are called "petty offenses." In the magistrate courts in June the most frequently cited lead charge was Title 8 U.S.C Section 1325 involving the "Entry of alien at improper time or place; etc.". This was the lead charge for 46.2 percent of all magistrate filings in June.

Other frequently prosecuted lead charges include: "8 USC 1326 - Reentry of deported alien" (39.5%), "8 USC 1324 - Bringing in and harboring certain aliens" (8.8%).

Immigration Prosecutions in U.S. District Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

Table 2 shows the top lead charges recorded in the prosecutions of immigration matters filed in U.S. District Court during June 2007.

Lead Charge Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
8 USC 1326 - Reentry of deported alien 482 1 1 1 More
8 USC 1324 - Bringing in and harboring certain aliens 212 2 2 2 More
8 USC 1325 - Entry of alien at improper time or place; etc. 37 3 3 3 More
18 USC 1546 - Fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents 30 4 4 4 More
18 USC 1028 - Fraud and related activity - id documents 17 5 5 7 More
42 USC 408 - Fed Old Age, Survivors + Disab Insur -Penalties 9 6 11 9 More
18 USC 911 - False personification - Citizen of the US 8 7 6 6 More
18 USC 1542 - False statement in application and use of passport 7 8 7 8 More
18 USC 1543 - Forgery or false use of passport 5 9 8 11 More
18 USC 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud US 3 10 10 10 More
18 USC 1001 - Fraud/false statements or entries generally 3 10 9 5 More

Table 2: Top charges filed

  • "Reentry of deported alien" (Title 8 U.S.C Section 1326) was the most frequent recorded lead charge. "Reentry of deported alien" (Title 8 U.S.C Section 1326) was ranked 1 a year ago, while it was the 1 most frequently invoked 5 years ago..

  • Ranked 2nd in frequency was the lead charge "Bringing in and harboring certain aliens" under Title 8 U.S.C Section 1324. "Bringing in and harboring certain aliens" under Title 8 U.S.C Section 1324 was ranked 2 a year ago, while it was the 2 most frequently invoked 5 years ago..

  • Ranked 3rd was "Entry of alien at improper time or place; etc." under Title 8 U.S.C Section 1325. "Entry of alien at improper time or place; etc." under Title 8 U.S.C Section 1325 was ranked 3 a year ago, while it was the 3 most frequently invoked 5 years ago..

Among these top ten lead charges, the one showing the greatest increase in prosecutions—up 27.3 percent—compared to one year ago was Title 18 U.S.C Section 1542 that involves " False statement in application and use of passport ". This was the same statute that had the largest increase—127.9 %—when compared with five years ago.

Again among the top ten lead charges, the one showing the sharpest decline in prosecutions compared to one year ago—down 33.3 percent—was Forgery or false use of passport (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1543 ). Compared to five years ago, the most significant decline in prosecutions— 71.1 percent—was for filings where the lead charge was " Fraud/false statements or entries generally " (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1001 ).

Top Ranked Judicial Districts

Understandably, there is great variation in the number of immigration prosecutions that are filed in each of the nation's ninety-four federal judicial districts.

The districts registering the largest number of prosecutions of this type last month are shown in Table 3.


Judicial District Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
Texas, S 180 1 1 1 More
Cal, S 89 2 5 3 More
Texas, W 72 3 2 4 More
Arizona 59 4 3 2 More
N Mexico 38 5 4 5 More
Fla, S 24 6 6 8 More
Cal, C 22 7 8 7 More
Fla, M 21 8 7 16 More
Mo, W 20 9 55 48 More
Oregon 18 10 11 11 More

Table 3: Top 10 districts

  • The Southern District of Texas (Houston)—with 180 prosecutions—was the most active during June 2007. The Southern District of Texas (Houston) was ranked 1 a year ago, while it was ranked 1 five years ago.

  • The Southern District of California (San Diego) ranked 2nd. The Southern District of California (San Diego) was ranked 5 a year ago, while it was ranked 3 five years ago.

  • Western District of Texas (San Antonio) is now ranking 3rd. The Western District of Texas (San Antonio) was ranked 2 a year ago, while it was ranked 4 five years ago.

Recent entrants to the top 10 list were Oregon , now ranked 10th , and Western District of Missouri (Kansas City) at 9th In the same order, these districts ranked 11th and 55th one year ago and 11th and 48th five years ago.

The federal judicial district which showed the greatest growth in immigration prosecutions compared to one year ago— 366.7 percent—was Western District of Missouri (Kansas City). This was the same district that had the largest increase— 438.5 %—when compared with five years ago.

In the last year, the judicial District Court recording the largest drop in immigration prosecutions— 30.6 percent—was Middle District of Florida (Tampa).  But over the past five years, Oregon showed the largest drop— 9.5 percent.

Top Ranked District Judges

At any one time, there are about 680 federal District Court judges working in the United States. The judges recorded with the largest number of new immigration crime cases of this type during June 2007 are shown in Table 4.

Judge Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
Brack, Robert C. N Mexico 36 1 1 - More
Tagle, Hilda G. Texas, S 31 2 4 6 More
Hanen, Andrew S. Texas, S 28 3 5 127 More
Crane, Randy Texas, S 26 4 6 17 More
Kazen, George P. Texas, S 20 5 2 3 More
Hinojosa, Ricardo H. Texas, S 19 6 9 13 More
Alvarez, Micaela Texas, S 18 7 3 - More
Rainey, John David Texas, S 16 8 15 149 More
Laughrey, Nanette Kay Mo, W 15 9 - 416 More
Briones, David Texas, W 14 10 11 4 More

Table 4: Top 10 judges

All 10 of the "top ten" judges were in districts which were in the top ten with the largest number of immigration filings .

  • Judge Robert C. Brack in the District of New Mexico ranked 1st with 36 defendants in immigration cases. Judge Brackalso appeared in the top ten rankings one year ago(ranked 1).

  • Judge Hilda G. Tagle in the Southern District of Texas (Houston) ranked 2nd with 31 defendants in immigration cases. Judge Tagle appeared in the top ten rankings one year (ranked 4) and five years ago (rank 6).

  • Judge Andrew S. Hanen in the Southern District of Texas (Houston) ranked 3rd with 28 defendants in immigration cases. Judge Hanenalso appeared in the top ten rankings one year ago(ranked 5).

TRAC Copyright
Copyright 2007, TRAC Reports, Inc.

TRAC RSS Feed for this page Email Feed for this page Email this page