Illegal immigration is undoubtedly a rousing topic which has divided both our society and Congress. Anything associated with immigration seems to create controversy. Recently, I read an article in the Los Angeles Times titled, "A kinder, gentler immigrant detention center." It discussed the new development of detention centers which are less hostile and incriminating. Paid by the United States government, GEO Group, Inc., which is responsible for building detention facilities for governments around the world, has a constructed a detention facility which provides the immigrant detainees with greater freedom while the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reviews its deportation cases. ICE has, in the past, been criticized for its treatment of detained immigrants, especially since those immigrants are often susceptible to violence and sexual harassment from others in regular prison facilities. This facility presents one of the first steps taken by the Obama administration to remedy a lot of the problems associated with regular prisons, a "regular" prison implying centers for murder, theft and other crimes.
The construction of this facility under the new guidelines set by ICE, however, has resulted in multiple criticisms. One of the key issues stems from general immigration bias, which holds these aliens are criminals and therefore should be treated as such. They do not need these nice facilities. For example, in the article, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) claims, "Changes to these facilities look more like recess than detention." Technically, yes, illegal immigrants are criminals because they crossed the border without the appropriate papers. But, at the same time, to equate someone who crosses the border without papers to someone who committed a bank robbery or murder is equally wrong. Often prison inmates have committed a dangerous crime to be placed in such a situation. In fact, according to the Bureau for Justice Statistics, 53 percent of state prison inmates were serving time for violent crimes and 18 percent for drugs in 2009.
The two situations are drastically different, and therefore they should not be forced to live in the same conditions. Criminals such as murderers pose a danger to society, but most illegal immigrants are not dangerous.
On the contrary, illegal immigrants are often refugees seeking asylum or people who have crossed the border looking for jobs; they are hardly dangerous. The punishment should match the crime; this is the definition of justice. To impose the same restrictions on an illegal immigrant and a murderer goes against the ideas of justice and equality. When immigrants are detained in regular prisons, they are treated as any other criminals. They are often denied appropriate health care, and many die as a result. Detainees should have greater freedom, access to their families and access to health care.
Furthermore, jails are limited in their space. It would be a waste to put people who did not commit a dangerous crime in a facility which is more appropriate for legitimate criminals who have physically threatened society. Because the number of people being deported has increased in recent years, there is a constant influx of people at the prison, so the spaces are usually filled.
Others have noted that private corporations will lower the standard for these facilities in order to reap more profit. Those criticisms do have a solid foundation. In the past, there have been reports of abuse and other issues in private prisons. But because the GEO Group, Inc. has a contract with the federal government, the company must adhere to the guidelines set by the government even though it is autonomously run. As a result, the company does not have the ability to lower the standard of the facilities. Moreover, companies are by definition businesses; their objective is to make profit. So, if they do make profit from these contracts, there is nothing to really criticize or object to as long as they make the profit without violating federal guidelines.
While perhaps the system of utilizing such businesses to create better detention facilities is not perfect, it is a necessary alternative. If it were the federal government single-handedly taking direct action by putting detainees in better facilities, other problems would arise. People would then claim the federal government had overstepped its authority. And improved prisons through political means would be difficult, given the polarized nature of immigration issues. The Obama administration will not further alienate voters by taking a stronger stance on the immigration issue and working with GEO. This new detention center functions as a compromise.
It would be more efficient to have separate facilities such as these for the purpose of housing immigrant detainees. As of now, these private facilities are the best viable alternative to ensuring that detainees are treated as they should.
Fariha Kabir's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at f.kabir@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: U.Va. Health lets fear trump its mission to do no harm
By Editorial Board | 7 hours agoIt is high time to resist these authoritative and dangerous actions before there are no federal avenues left for resistance.
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 3 days agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
