US deports Cambodian despite stay order by US court

[geovalin]

Despite an emergency stay order to prevent the deportation of a Cambodian from the United States last week, the US authorities still went ahead with the deportation, forcing him to leave the country with literally just the clothes on his back. The deportee was one of 30 recently deported from the US despite an emergency stay order issue by a judge to prevent the deportation.

 

As a result of the blatant flouting of the judge’s decision, the deportee had to leave the US – even through he had a temporary stay order issued. He had come to US as a refugee some 30 years ago and lived in California. A local online news site, CNE, said that the man had received an emergency stay of removal on Jan. 14, according to court records from the Board of Immigration Appeals.

 

However, tragically, that was two days after he was deported, according to Kevin Lo, an attorney at legal and civil rights organization Asian American Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus. Lo said he does not have his client’s permission to share details about his case. He estimated that at least a few deportees in each of the past five deportation flights to Cambodia since early 2018 have experienced similar situations and say this is a blatant disrespect of the judiciary.

 

read more https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50681175/us-deports-cambodian-despite-stay-order-by-us-court

[DoctorG]

5 hours ago, geovalin said:

As a result of the blatant flouting of the judge’s decision, the deportee had to leave the US – even through he had a temporary stay order issued. He had come to US as a refugee some 30 years ago and lived in California. A local online news site, CNE, said that the man had received an emergency stay of removal on Jan. 14, according to court records from the Board of Immigration Appeals.

 

However, tragically, that was two days after he was deported,

If the order came AFTER he was deported, then it was not a blatant flouting as reported above.

Edited January 20, 2020 by DoctorG
typo

[Caldera]

5 hours ago, DoctorG said:

If the order came AFTER he was deported, then it was not a blatant flouting as reported above.

Indeed, that's a very misleading statement and headline.

[Scott Tracy]

I read the headlines and was angered. Then I read the details and was angered that the headline was misleading.

 

[rgraham]

He had 30 years to get it together, we should have made him swim home.

[Sheryl]

19 minutes ago, Scott Tracy said:

I read the headlines and was angered. Then I read the details and was angered that the headline was misleading.

 

 

The headline wording is misleading but it is the case that judicial process was ignored.

 

A request for a stay had been filed. When that is done, they cannot legally deport until there is a ruling .

 

Just like you can't execute someone who has a court ruling on a stay of execution still pending.

 

Supposed to wait for the court ruling. In not doing  so, they broke the law and yes, did nindeed flout the judicial system.

 

(And of course as we know now the ruling went in his favor....but even if it had not, it would still be illegal to deport him prior to the court's ruling.)

[Dumbastheycome]

I can agree the Headline was misleading. However I do have to consider the process which led to a  stay order which would have been happening in the knowledge of US Immigration who it seems acted in  pre-emptive defiance of any outcome. After 30 years an individual is summarily ejected before his day in court could be considered. What  makes it sadder is that the Court belatedly  found  in his  favor !

 

 

[Monomial]

On 1/20/2020 at 8:26 PM, Sheryl said:

 

The headline wording is misleading but it is the case that judicial process was ignored.

 

A request for a stay had been filed. When that is done, they cannot legally deport until there is a ruling .

 

Just like you can't execute someone who has a court ruling on a stay of execution still pending.

 

Supposed to wait for the court ruling. In not doing  so, they broke the law and yes, did nindeed flout the judicial system.

 

(And of course as we know now the ruling went in his favor....but even if it had not, it would still be illegal to deport him prior to the court's ruling.)

 

I don't believe this is true Sheryl. I believe the stay actually has to be granted by a judge before it becomes effective. If there is a previous judgement,  that judgement remains in effect until a new ruling (e.g. a stay) becomes effective.

 

Normally, a judge will grant an emergency stay at the beginning of an appeal pending the outcome of the proceedings. Just filing for a stay though does not yet mean that the stay is in effect. I will admit I am a bit hazy on the details of this, so perhaps there are legal considerations I am not aware of. But at first glance I don't believe the authorities did anything legally wrong.  If they had a judgement of deportation, they are legally allowed to deport him unless and until a new judgement is rendered by a competent court.

 

 

[Monomial]

Edit:  Some useful information on the process here:

 

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-wait-the-us-decision-asylum-appeal.html

 

The key thing is that you are subject to deportation until the Court of Appeals grants your Stay of Removal. In this case, the guy just got a crappy attorney who did not move fast enough to get the paperwork processed.  And the government was inexplicably efficient in their enforcement of the deportation order.