Misinformation threatens sound immigration policy

OPINION:

Of the many public policy issues plagued with misinformation these days, immigration remains near the top of the list. Unfortunately, a recent Washington Times article (“Up to 33% of ICE catch-and-release migrants abscond: GAO audit.” Web, June 22) contributes to this problem.

This article twisted government data to cast doubt on a successful program that helps noncitizens comply with federal immigration rules. It characterized the federal Alternatives to Detention efforts as a “catch and release program,” which gave the false impression that migrants are let loose to do whatever they please with no supervision.

In reporting the findings of a recent audit from the Government Accountability Office, the article highlighted that up to one-third of participants in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ATD did not comply with the conditions of the program. Further, the paper referred to “unfavorable outcomes” and a “high failure rate” without providing basic and proper context. Instead, the facts demonstrate that data cited in the report was skewed by the pandemic.

When COVID-19 hit during the Trump administration, ICE transitioned to remote services to better fulfill its mission. ICE then chose to terminate a significant number of cases, causing the rate of absconders to jump. But data from both before the pandemic and after the height of restrictions shows that this was a one-time blip. Absconder rates dropped to just 7.7% from August 2021 to May 2022. In fact, the GAO report documents low absconder rates when looking both at active and unenrolled participants, versus only those who were unenrolled.  In 2015, for example, absconder rates were a dramatically low 4%.

In general, ATD has been successful because participants who qualify — based on their lack of any criminal history, track record of compliance, and community and family ties — are able to live in the community and check in with their case specialists. Many of the participants are refugees and individuals requesting asylum — a request that not enough journalists explain is fully permissible under U.S. law. 

Critically, the existence of such alternatives means that ICE resources can concentrate on other individuals who need more scrutiny before earning legal status while helping manage an already overburdened processing activity in existing detention programs along the border. Anyone who is genuinely concerned about illegal immigration should welcome an approach that helps prioritize safety and order.

I recently visited an ICE facility set up to monitor ATD participants. From what I witnessed, participants are eager to comply with the rules of the program as they continue with the process of judicial hearings for their case, because it means they can continue to live in their local community — a powerful incentive that keeps the process nonconfrontational and creates more order as noncitizens pursue legal immigration channels.

Consider that between August 2021 and May 2022, 99.6% of participants in ATD’s select Intensive Supervision Appearance Program attended required meetings with their case specialists; 99.3% attended all their required Immigration Court hearings. That is a remarkable success rate.  

I appreciate that the GAO has established recommendations for ICE to create performance goals to improve the ATD program. Looking accurately at the data in proper context demonstrates that providing alternatives to detention is constructive policy — something that most people would agree is desperately needed in the current bureaucratic mess that is the broader process for legal immigration.  

• Mario H. Lopez is president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund, a nonpartisan public policy advocacy organization that advances liberty, opportunity and prosperity for all.