Immigration Prosecutions for June 2019

Number Latest Month 8,946
Percent Change from previous month -3.7
Percent Change from 1 year ago 15.4
Percent Change from 5 years ago
(Including Magistrate Court)
39.7
Percent Change from 5 years ago
(Excluding Magistrate Court)
11.9
Table 1. Criminal Immigration Prosecutions

The latest available data from the Justice Department show that during June 2019 the government reported 8946 new immigration prosecutions. According to the case-by-case information analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), this number is down 3.7 percent 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 2019 prosecutions of this type are compared with those of the same period in the previous year, the number of filings was up (15.4%). 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 39.7 percent from levels reported in 2014.

The 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 11.9 percent instead of 39.7 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.


Figure 1. Monthly Trends in Immigration Prosecutions

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. Where a prosecution was initially filed in U.S. Magistrate Court and then transferred to the U.S. District Court, the magistrate filing date was used since this provides an earlier indicator of actual trends. 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.

Pie chart of agenrevgrp

Figure 2. Prosecutions by Investigative Agency

Virtually all federal criminal prosecutions for immigration offenses in June 2019 (100 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 2019, 7736 defendants in immigration cases for these matters were filed in U.S. Magistrate Courts. These courts handle less serious misdemeanor cases, including what are called "petty offenses." In addition, complaints are sometimes filed in the magistrate courts before an indictment or information is entered. In these cases, the matter starts in the magistrate courts and later moves to the district court where subsequent proceedings take place.

In the magistrate courts in June the most frequently cited lead charge was Title 8 U.S.C Section 1325 involving "Entry of alien at improper time or place; etc.". This was the lead charge for 57.7 percent of all magistrate filings in June.

Other frequently prosecuted lead charges include: "08 USC 1326 - Reentry of deported alien" (35.7%).

Immigration Prosecutions in U.S. District Courts

In June 2019, 1210 defendants in new cases for these matters were charged in the U.S. District Courts. In addition during June there were an additional 1581 defendants whose cases moved from the magistrate courts to the U.S. district courts after an indictment or information was filed. The sections which follow cover both sets of cases and therefore cover all matters filed in district court during June.

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 2019.

Lead Charge Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
08 USC 1326 - Reentry of deported alien 2,222 1 1 1 More
08 USC 1324 - Bringing in and harboring certain aliens 362 2 2 2 More
18 USC 1546 - Fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents 53 3 4 3 More
08 USC 1325 - Entry of alien at improper time or place; etc. 32 4 3 4 More
18 USC 1544 - Misuse of passport 27 5 5 5 More
18 USC 1001 - Fraud/false statements or entries generally 24 6 8 8 More
18 USC 2314 - Transportation of stolen goods, etc 21 7 - - More
18 USC 1543 - Forgery or false use of passport 9 8 15 16 More
18 USC 922 - Firearms; Unlawful acts 7 9 7 9 More
21 USC 952 - Importation of controlled substances 5 10 13 20 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 ranked 1 five 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 ranked 2 five years ago.

  • Ranked 3rd was "Fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1546. "Fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1546 was ranked 4 a year ago, while it was ranked 3 five years ago.

Among these top ten lead charges, the one showing the greatest increase in prosecutions — up 350 percent — compared to one year ago was Title 18 U.S.C Section 1543 that involves " Forgery or false use of passport ". This was the same statute that had the largest increase — 500 % — 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 72.6 percent — was " Entry of alien at improper time or place; etc. " (Title 8 U.S.C Section 1325 ). Compared to five years ago, the most significant decline in prosecutions — 20.5 percent — was for filings where the lead charge was " Misuse of passport " (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1544 ).

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 856 1 2 2 More
Texas, W 675 2 1 1 More
N Mexico 269 3 4 3 More
Cal, S 240 4 3 5 More
Arizona 230 5 5 4 More
Fla, S 53 6 6 6 More
Fla, M 33 7 7 9 More
Puer Rico 32 8 11 13 More
N Car, E 31 9 12 43 More
Mich, E 20 10 10 8 More
Table 3. Top 10 Districts

  • The Southern District of Texas (Houston) — with 856 prosecutions — was the most active during June 2019. The Southern District of Texas (Houston) was ranked 2 a year ago, while it was ranked 2 for most frequent use five years ago.

  • The Western District of Texas (San Antonio) ranked 2nd. The Western District of Texas (San Antonio) was ranked 1 a year ago, while it was ranked 1 for most frequent use five years ago.

  • District of New Mexico is now ranking 3rd. The District of New Mexico was ranked 4 a year ago, while it was ranked 3 for most frequent use five years ago.

Recent entrants to the top 10 list were Puerto Rico , now ranked 8th , and Eastern District of North Carolina (Raleigh) at 9th In the same order, these districts ranked 11th and 12th one year ago and 13th and 43rd five years ago.

The federal judicial district which showed the greatest growth in immigration prosecutions compared to one year ago — 33.7 percent — was Southern District of Texas (Houston). Compared to five years ago, the district with the largest growth — 287 percent — was Eastern District of North Carolina (Raleigh).

In the last year, the judicial District Court recording the largest drop in immigration prosecutions — 31.8 percent — was Southern District of California (San Diego).  But over the past five years, Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit) showed the largest drop — 32.8 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 2019 are shown in Table 4.

Judge Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
Garcia Marmolejo, Marina Texas, S 147 1 21 23 More
Saldana, Diana Texas, S 142 2 18 16 More
Ramos, Nelva Gonzales Texas, S 136 3 5 9 More
Gonzales, Kenneth John N Mexico 106 4 3 3 More
Counts, Walter David, III Texas, W 106 4 6 - More
Martinez, Philip Ray Texas, W 96 6 7 12 More
Guaderrama, David C. Texas, W 95 7 13 15 More
Cardone, Kathleen Texas, W 93 8 11 13 More
Montalvo, Frank Texas, W 87 9 12 10 More
Moses, Alia M. Texas, W 73 10 1 1 More
Table 4. Top Ten 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 Marina Garcia Marmolejo in the Southern District of Texas (Houston) ranked 1st with 147 defendants in immigration cases.

  • Judge Diana Saldana in the Southern District of Texas (Houston) ranked 2nd with 142 defendants in immigration cases.

  • Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos in the Southern District of Texas (Houston) ranked 3rd with 136 defendants in immigration cases. Judge Ramos appeared in the top ten rankings one year (ranked 5) and five years ago (rank 9).

Report Generated: August 9, 2019
TRAC Copyright
Copyright 2019, TRAC Reports, Inc.

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