Florida Plans To Deputize 9 National Guardsmen as Immigration Judges To Increase Deportations
Legal experts are concerned that immigration judges with only six weeks of training will not uphold constitutional protections for migrants.

After months of waiting for federal approval to deputize Florida National Guard Judge Advocate General Corps officers (JAGs) as immigration judges, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and President Donald Trump indicated during a visit to the newly opened "Alligator Alcatraz" at the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport that the plan will move forward.
According to Florida's 37-page Immigration Enforcement Operations Plan submitted by state officials in May, the Florida National Guard has nine field-grade JAGs suitable for training as immigration judges, and can be trained within six weeks of Justice Department approval. "The Florida National Guard has offered JAGs to be trained as immigration judges to expedite the legal process at the request of the federal government," and speed up immigration deportations, per the document.
After touring Florida's newest immigration detention facility in the Everglades, Trump expressed approval for the plan. "On January 20, I signed an executive order empowering governors and state police to be deputized to enforce federal immigration laws, and Ron's already taken advantage of it," Trump said. Later, while answering questions from reporters, Trump added, "Yes, he has my approval. That wasn't too hard to get, was it?…He didn't even have to ask me."
Legal experts have expressed concerns about this plan given the intricacies of immigration law. "Immigration law is very complex," Fola Olubunmi, an immigration attorney, told WINK News. "With immigration judges, you have to have a certain amount of experience and understanding of the laws in order to be able to do that job."
Deputizing and quickly training JAGs in immigration could mean "hav[ing] people on the bench that don't understand the process, don't understand immigration law," Olubunmi said. "And so what we're going to see a lot of is just…he or she is going to sit there. They're going to listen, but then they're just going to deny."
Incorporating JAGs into Florida's immigration enforcement is the last piece of the state's immigration blueprint. Along with deputizing the National Guard to act as immigration judges, the plan outlines enhancing intelligence collection and coordination between agencies, training 47,000 law enforcement officers to act as immigration officers under the 287(g) program, and constructing more detention centers to hold up to 10,000 people.
Much of this plan has already taken shape. The sharing of surveillance data between the Florida Highway Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was confirmed in public records; more than half of 287(g) agreements are in Florida, and the newly opened Alligator Alcatraz has the potential to hold up to 5,000 migrant detainees.
While Florida intends to seek reimbursement from the federal government, the plan acknowledges that the state may have to act independently and may not be fully repaid, making a "long-term immigration support mission…fiscally untenable," according to the plan.
DeSantis invoked the "rule of law" in a news conference on Monday for why the Sunshine State must attempt to mass deport undocumented Florida denizens—of which there are an estimated 1.2 million currently in the state—alongside the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. However, the roadmap shows little regard for due process or constitutional protections, and advocates for "an overreach of state authority and displacing federal law," which "may result in false imprisonment and exorbitant costs," as reported by the Tallahassee Democrat.
"This basically would change how immigration detention is managed, and that flies in the face of several decades of litigation that have established constitutional protections for people in detention and how you even get to be put in detention," Elizabeth Ricci, an immigration attorney in Tallahassee, Florida, told the Democrat.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
“Legal experts are concerned that immigration judges with only six weeks of training will not uphold constitutional protections for migrants.“
Feature, not a bug.
It's less about the amount of training. More the probability that those doing the training WANT slapdash incompetence.
Similar to how we fail to train police officers and then 'wonder' why they abuse everyone.
Why are you against due process?
3 weeks of training should be enough.
Not THAT due process. Only due process in front of activist liberal judges.
No, only due "process" that never quite makes it in front of a judge, and so lingers on and on and on and...
That the working citizens of the US have to pay for. Don't forget that they will lord over us peasants how they are better than us and we should be happy working a bit if overtime to pay for the privilege of keeping some lawyers paid handsomely.
could mean
Precautionary principle is bullshit. Call me if a JAG officer - which should have been in the headline instead of just national guardsman - fucks up. Until then, lawyers become judges sort of how you get judges. Sure may not be their normal practice but if the starting QB goes down you go to the bench, next man up.
Precautionary principle is bullshit. Call me if a JAG officer - which should have been in the headline instead of just national guardsman - fucks up.
Reason has been on a roll with disingenuous headlines this morning.
Remember when DeSantis would play fast and loose with his service, he served near SEALs and somehow that made him a SEAL?? I bet it worked with the high school girls before he found his slump buster wife.
DOWN WITH OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING! LET PEOPLE WORK!
+1
ya funny
I didnt move to Haiti because I dont want to live there, in that society, composed of those people, under their laws and customs.
Similarly, I dont want my neighborhood to turn into a Haitian satellite office, bringing Haiti to my door. This should not be controversial, but apparently shitlibs think it is.
But you do want to move to Cuba…and the Cubans in America are entitled pussies that refused to fight for their country and then demand special privileges in America! That’s how you get entitled pussies like George W Bush and Lizard Cheney elected to high office.
So how do you plan on preventing your neighbor from selling his/her house to Haitian immigrants? It's not your property.
I know! You and your neighbors could get together to form a type of "council" that would decide for the entire neighborhood what they all can or can't do with their property. We can call this council a "soviet".
FIFY
People have said the same thing about Chinese, Italians, Germans, Irish, Greeks, and every other wave of immigrants. You’re no different than the xenophobes who were against people in your family tree settling in this country.
>>This basically would change how immigration detention is managed
not really. "immigration judges" were under article II before you got mad
They'er illegal aliens, not migrants. Words have meaning, and she knows it.
Yes words have meaning. They are only illegal aliens AFTER a judge confirms that. Not before - and not because you and your ilk want to hang them first because that makes for good politics
Which does not take a life-long trial judge to determine that.
I agree. But it takes the ability to pend judgement to determine that.
False. That's like saying a star doesn't become a star until some astronomer confirms that it is a star. Or that a cube doesn't become a cube until some geometrician confirms that it is a cube.
Fucking A. There are definitions for things, and things meet those definitions regardless of whether or not an authority expresses their opinion on the matter.
If someone enters this country illegally, or remains in this country illegally (e.g. overstaying their visa), they are illegal aliens by definition and without the need for an authority to stamp the designation on some paperwork. Period.
Well with Jeffy here defining things, I will quote X character RetardFinder: "Found one!"
No, you're confusing concepts. Again.
You are a felon after you've been adjudicated guilty. But that doesn't mean you haven't committed a felony *until* you've been judged guilty.
An illegal immigrant is an illegal immigrant from the moment that they immigrate illegally. There can be some gray area as to whether or not they're here illegally - and the courts will sort that out - but if the courts find that they're here illegally then they've always been here illegally.
You’re not like Marco Rubio who believes Cubans are “exiles” and thus are entitled to special privileges in America like fast tracked citizenship?? Oh, and they can block traffic in America but got forbid they have to take up arms to fight elderly communists…just the thought makes Marco Rubio pee pee his panties.
I listened to a very hardcore well-known, practicing lawyer explain in autistic detail how this whole thing works, and debunked how the media often portrays how the 'due process' game of whackbat goes with illegal immigrants. There are jackoffs in the media that suggest that every illegal immigrant must be allowed to stay until they receive a full, nine-month long jury trial with pleas, facts of evidence, discovery, adversarial lawyers dueling in the courtroom, and that's simply not how this works.
The amount of due process, according to the lawyer was entirely based on the person's "liberty and property interests". And the fact of the matter is, an illegal immigrant has a much lower level of liberty and property interest than does a legal migrant, and lower still than a citizen. Due process for an illegal immigrant can be as simple as an unnamed bureaucrat behind a desk, reviewing his paperwork and saying, "Yeah, no" and stamping it with "deport".
Due process for an illegal immigrant can be as simple as an unnamed bureaucrat behind a desk, reviewing his paperwork and saying, "Yeah, no" and stamping it with "deport".
Would we call this bureaucrat a member of the so-called 'deep state'?
Thankfully we value liberty so much in this country that we put random bureaucrats in charge of whether or not migrants are sent to third-world torture prisons.
Found one
So we have to leave "asylum seekers" in country indefinitely because we do not have enough immigration judges. Now that we have found a way to appoint new immigration judges, now there is hand wringing over experience.
It is almost as if the objection is not about due process, but about ensuring that they do not get legally processed at all.
We don’t have asylum seekers in America, remember Trump was president before and built the wall! 😉
Actually Trump promised the wall, Biden actually built the wall.
Trump built the turtle wall to keep Mexican turtles out of America…but those are some bad tortugas! 😉
The goal is to enforce the law *correctly* without violating anyone's rights or liberties.
Would YOU want your fate decided by a fake judge with 6 weeks of training?
I think it is safe to say that a JAG officer is a not untrained lawyer. Again, this is griping for the sake of obfuscation. Not any genuine concern.
You didn't answer my question.
Would YOU want your fate decided by a fake judge with 6 weeks of training?
As none of the immigration "judges" are members of the judicial branch, I suppose they are all "fake" in the strict definition. I answered your question as I did because the premise is incorrect. These are all trained legal minds. Having six weeks training in the specific field does make them "fake".
I think what yiu really is that they are ideologically corrupt and will not disregard the law as written.
My fate is in my own hands. I am not overstaying my welcome in a foreign country. Quit being a Retard and excusing stupid behavior.
"Fake judge"? A fake judge is an actor that says in a commercial, "I am not a judge, but I play one on TV," or a someone fraudulently impersonating an officer of the court.
JAG Officers, trained and vetted, and given the appropriate titles, authorities, and responsibilities, aren't fake.
For fuck's sake, people, words have meanings. Twisting them in some rhetorical contortions is simply disingenuous sophistry.
What is hilarious is that federal district judges have absolutely no eligibility criteria - not even requiring a legal education. But dipshit says we are to take their legal pronouncements as the final word.
But trained and experienced lawyers can't run through what is basically a checklist and evaluate defense statements and evidence as to why so-and-so should be permitted to stay?
Now do NY prosecutors and judges.
And don't forget, putting them in jail in the meantime is now a concentration camp.
All that Florida is doing sounds completely reasonable. I am not concerned that JAG officers may not have "experience". After processing thousands of illegal aliens, they will be the experts. These are trained attorneys. They will need to adjudicate administrative law, not try criminal cases. They only need to determine whether the illegal aliens should be allowed to stay.
Certainly, there should be due process to establish whether or not the person is here legally, but if it's been established that they broke the law to get into this country, what more due process is needed?
^ this
If an "illegal" immigrant has no criminal record and appears healthy, let's not deport them, let's give them a green card - on the spot if that's possible.
Just the opposite.
If they are here illegally, throw them out.
Which is why a trained JAG officer really shouldn't need another six weeks of training.
Question one. Do you have papers showing where and when you entered the USA legally?
If the answer is no -
Question two. Where should we send you?
Only if a Democrat volunteers to leave the US.
Why should unlawful behavior be rewarded?
That's the fundamental problem.
One of my dearest friends is a legal immigrant, now an American citizen. You want to talk about the hoops he jumped through and all of the patience he had because he wanted to make his life here?
The folks who get green cards should be the ones who followed the rules. Period. Nobody should be allowed to jump the queue. Not just a matter of fairness, a matter of incentives, because incentivizing lawlessness sends the sorts of signals that get you tens of millions of illegal aliens flooding into the country.
If Elena Kagan can be a SC Justice, I think a JAG will do fine as an immigration judge.
Remember when you voted for Bush/Cheney because you supported sacrificing American soldiers to slaughter innocent Muslims?? That was weird, right??
So... there have never been any inexperienced immigration judges just starting out? Every immigration judge [that is not a deputized and trained JAG Officer] was already an experienced immigration judge when they became an immigration judge?
What a stupid remark.
Ful o balonium is an anagram of Fola Olubunmi
Blue states now want to know if they can designate National Guardsmen as abortion providers.
What range are we talking about?
This actually makes sense and JAG officers are generally well-qualified to do it. The legal criteria are straightforward enough for 6 weeks to provide ample training in applying them. As a law professor I taught hundreds of future JAG officers and without exception, they all take their professional responsibilities seriously.
"Immigration law is very complex,"
"Sir/Ma'am, would you like to self-deport at this time? Doing so voluntarily will offer you the opportunity to attempt legal immigration again in the future."
"No."
"Are you sure?"
"Yes."
"Are you really sure? Because now this is about to become very complex."
"Yes."
"OK. Are you an American citizen?"
"No."
"Get out. You are not allowed to come back. ICE, chain him up and put him on the next plane to CECOT."
Boy howdy, that was tough to wrap the 'ol noodle around, wasn't it.
Beat me to it.
Another pointless desperate article from Reason. Specious arguments and quotes from random self interested parties about speculative outcomes with zero evidence. Just pathetic.
A couple hundred hours training for already qualified lawyers should be ample. After all, look at all the commentators we have who are experts on complex issues like inflation, tariffs, social security, foreign policy, Middle Eastern and Russian empire history, social justice, psychology, health insurance, microbiology, climate change, etc. etc. who learned everything they know from attending a rally, reading a couple columnists in the Atlantic, or schmoozing in their dorm room.
>Legal experts are concerned that immigration judges with only six weeks of training will not uphold constitutional protections for migrants.
Autumn, these are *JAG* officers - professional lawyers. With years of experience lawyering and as judges.
How many weeks of experience does a brand new civilian immigration judge have on the first day of their job?