Shortly after taking office in January, President Donald Trump issued a set of executive orders aimed at reversing the “unprecedented flood of illegal immigration into the United States.” These orders, in addition to increasing the federal presence at the U.S.-Mexico border, instruct Dept. of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to “ensure the efficient and expedited removal of aliens from the United States.”

Among the federal government’s recent actions are invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport individuals without trial, and coming to an agreement with El Salvador to pay the Salvadoran government to accept individuals (including non-Salvadorans) for incarceration in the Terrorism Confinement Center in Tecoluca (popularly known as CECOT).

There are an estimated 11 million people present in the U.S. alleged to have entered the country illegally. The Press spoke with local legal experts to find out whether, and how, the administration’s policies could affect local residents. Part One addresses legal immigration and due process around deportation. Part Two will cover local cooperation with federal actions.

Seeking counsel, ways to avoid removal

Kermit Roosevelt, David Berger Professor for the Administration of Justice at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, explains what due process means in the context of immigration law.

“Due process is required, first and most important, to determine what category a person falls into,” Roosevelt says, explaining that “we shouldn’t start with the question of what process is due for a person who entered the country illegally – we should ask what process is due if the government alleges that a person entered the country illegally and proposes to do something to them on that ground.”

He elaborates that it is “generally agreed (and currently the law) that an individual who’s alleged to be in the country illegally is entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge who will determine whether that’s true. People alleged to be in the country illegally are not entitled to a court-appointed attorney, but they are allowed to hire their own lawyer.”

Associate Professor Jennifer J. Lee teaches at Temple University Beasley School of Law. Lee explains that “in most cases, whether you came in lawfully or not, you are entitled to due process before being removed.” There are exceptions, she notes, explaining that the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 created a process called “expedited removal,” by which immigration authorities can remove individuals from the country without an immigration hearing if they “entered without inspection,” cannot demonstrate that they have been continuously present in the U.S. for more than two years, and are not applying for asylum.

Michael Renneisen of Lehigh Immigration works with individuals in the Lehigh Valley. He explains that contacting an attorney is a wise step for someone who entered the country illegally.

“Find a good attorney to speak with,” he says, and pay the consultation fee, which may be a few hundred dollars. “You don’t have to pay them to take your case, but having someone who can give you an accurate sense of what risk you are facing, and what you can do to change it, is so important.”

An attorney actually working every day in immigration law can be helpful in ways that a notary – who may help with filing forms – cannot. “Just having that knowledge cannot be overestimated,” Renneisen says.

“With immigration law,” Renneisen notes, “you’re dealing with human lives. Everyone’s life is different from the next person, whether dramatically or not, so the law has to take that into consideration. It’s inherently complex, because lives are complex.”

He points out two ways of avoiding removal that have different criteria: asylum and cancellation of removal. People seeking asylum have to file within one year of entering the U.S., and must prove that they did not resettle in another country between fleeing their country of origin and the United States.

Cancellation of removal, Renneisen explains, can be thought of as “an off-ramp for people who are deportable, but whose deportation would be more detrimental to their community or to the United States than it would be beneficial. The individual must be able to prove that he has been in the United States for at least 10 years, and that deportation would result in an “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” for the person’s child or parent or spouse who is a legal permanent resident or U.S. citizen.

The situation for people who meet the legal standard for cancellation of removal highlights one of the bottlenecks in immigration: visa shortages.

“A person who is successful in a cancellation case will eventually obtain residency in the U.S.,” Renneisen says, but will likely have to wait for the process to be complete, because only 4,000 visas of this type are issued every year. A person meeting the standard has his case held until a visa becomes available.

People who have a federally issued alien number, but are unsure of their status, can check that status online (acis.eoir.justice.gov/en/).

“If you think you may be in removal proceedings, but you don’t know where or when,” Renneisen says, this Dept. of Justice website with digitized immigration proceedings can be helpful.

Coming in ‘through the front door’ means waiting for years – or decades

Immigration law has changed a great deal since the days when immigrants came to the Lehigh Valley and the coal regions of Pennsylvania in the early 19th century.

There was no limit on immigration until the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which began the practice of limits on immigration by nation of origin. The Emergency Immigration Act of 1921 and the Immigration Act of 1924, created quotas (limits) on the number of people who could come to the United States from specific nations of Southern and Eastern Europe, and in total from the Eastern Hemisphere.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 abolished the national origins formula (while maintaining per-country limits), created seven categories of ranked preference, and set for the first time a limit on immigration from Western Hemisphere nations. The Immigration Act of 1990 raised the total immigration limit to 675,000 people per year (with a slightly higher limit for the years 1992 – 1994), changed family-based and employment-based visa categories, and created a “diversity visa” category for underrepresented nations.

Today, the basic framework established in 1965 and adjusted in 1990 stands. There is no limit on the number of visas that can be issued to “immediate family” (parents, spouses, and children under 21 of U.S. citizens); the United States issues roughly one million visas per year across all categories, with immediate family receiving the majority. National quotas are not based on the heritage of current Americans or on the size of national populations, but capped at seven percent of the total cap of 675,000. (The total number of visas issued worldwide in a year exceeds the statutory limit, because immediate family visas are permitted to exceed the cap of 254,000.)

Each recognized country has a maximum of 44,100 “family” visas for immigrants who are not immediate family of U.S. citizens, and 14,700 employment-based immigrant visas per year; those not used can be rolled over to the next fiscal year (but not traded among countries). Family-based visas include unmarried children age 21 and older of U.S. citizens, and spouses and children of legal permanent residents. Employment-based visas are ranked, from “persons of extraordinary ability” in various professions, including athletics, through individuals investing at least $1 million in a new business that creates at least 10 jobs.

The backlog for a successful applicant to receive a non-immediate family immigrant visa stretches for years. For example, in October 2023, the U.S. Customs and Immigration Service was granting visas to U.S. citizens’ unmarried children age 21 and over in Mexico who applied for their visas in April 2001.

Lehigh Immigration is reachable by phone (610-533-1947), online (www.LehighImmigration.com), and at its Bethlehem office (559 Main Street, Suite 150). More information on Professor Jennifer Lee and Temple Beasley School of Law can be found online (law.temple.edu/contact/jennifer-j-lee/). More information on Professor Kermit Roosevelt and UPenn Carey Law School can be found online (law.upenn.edu/faculty/krooseve).