 |
 Putting TRAC to Work |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Sidney Austin, LLP, ACLU Foundation of Southern California, and Standford Law School Immigrant Rights Clinic |
|
|
October 17, 2016 |
|
|
No. 15-1204 in the Supreme Court of the United States, David Jennings, et al., Petitioners, v. Alejandro Rodriguez, et al., Respondents. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
By Mark H. Haddad, Ahilan T. Arulananthan, Sean A. Commons, Michael Kaufman, Wen W. Shen, Judy Rabinovitz, Michael K.T. Tan, Cecillia D. Wang, Steven R. Shapiro and Jayashri Srikantiah, Counsel for Respondent
|
|
|
|
|
The source for Petitioners’ assertion that individuals released on bond abscond 41% of the time was rejected as unreliable when Petitioners sought judicial notice of it before the Ninth Circuit. Req. for Judicial Notice Order 6-7, ECF No. 133. That statistic is irrelevant and flawed. It includes the large number of individuals released on bond by DHS without the benefit of custody hearings. It has no bearing on the appearance rates of Class members, who are released only after hearings where IJs are required to consider imposing intensive supervision methods.
The statistic is also flawed. A different study of the same time period that focuses on individuals released after IJ bond hearings shows that 86% of individuals released by IJs appear for proceedings. Even this number, which includes all IJ bond hearings, likely underestimates the rate at which Class members appear, given the extremely high success rate of intensive supervision programs.....[Citing TRAC research].
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, Syracuse University
Copyright 2016
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
