Immigration Reform

First DREAMer Deported Under the Trump Administration

By Peek & Toland on October 9, 2017

The arrival of the Trump administration led to considerable speculation about the future of so-called DREAMERs. Recently, the first DREAMer deported under the new administration sparked increased concern.

DREAMERS are undocumented immigrants who were protected under Obama’s Dream Act.

Juan Manuel Montes Bojorquez, 23, was sent to his home country of on February 17 just hours after he failed to provide identification of his legal residency to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent.

Trump administration saw first DREAMer deported

The first DREAMer was deported under the Trump administration

A report in People said Montes was out with his girlfriend and waiting for a taxi when the agent came and questioned him. He said he’d left his wallet in a friend’s car. Because he was unable to prove he was protected under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), he was transferred into custody. Agents took him across the border a few hours later.

Alarm as First DREAMer deported under the Trump Administration

People who qualified for the DACA program have been concerned about its future under the Trump administration.

The program helps DREAMers who are foreign-born individuals brought to the United States. as children. Obama’s flagship policy gave them a two-year work permit, a social security number, and protection from deportation.

The People report said Montes applied for DACA status in 2014, then again in 2016. He was meant to be protected until 2018, because the program runs for two full years.

The Trump administration previously moved to reassure DREAMers they were safe under the Trump administration.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary, John Kelly said the DACA program is “alive and well.”

However, the deportation of Montes Bojorquez left the DREAMer community nervous.

In our blog we describe how the election of Trump left those who benefitted from Obama’s policy in limbo.

These are uncertain and difficult times for immigrants. If you or a family member is facing possible deportation from Texas and need assistance to fight the action, please call Peek Toland & Castañeda PLLC at (512) 474-4445.

Posted in Immigration, Immigration Reform

Tagged with:

White House is Urged to Keep the International Entrepreneur Rule

By Peek & Toland on October 7, 2017

Concerns over the future of the International Entrepreneur Rule that allows business leaders from other countries to come to the United States more easily, have led American business leaders to put pressure on the White House.

An article in The Hill in June noted investors, entrepreneurs, and civic leaders are pushing the Trump administration to not block the rule that would smooth the way for entrepreneurs from other countries to come to the U.S.

We outlined the finalized rule earlier this year. Investors who can pump at least $250,000 into the U.S. economy can benefit under the International Entrepreneur Rule.

The measure was originally proposed by the Obama administration. It allows the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to evaluate whether or not business owners can relocate to the U.S. to grow their companies, on a case-by-case basis.

business community fights for the International Entrepreneur Rule

Almost 80 groups representing investors, startup founders, economic development organizations and civic leaders sent a letter in May to the White House. They urged the administration to not roll back the International Entrepreneur Rule due to go into effect on July 17. In the letter they argued:

“Immigrant entrepreneurs are a critical driver of increased economic activity, as they play an outsized role in new company creation in communities all across our country.”

Over the summer, administration officials held a meeting with the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), a Washington DC trade association that represents venture capital and entrepreneurial interests.

The Trump administration has not taken a stance on the International Entrepreneur Rule.

The groups believe the U.S. is missing out on potential investment from overseas. They say while the rule is not a substitute for legislation, it may be an important step to bringing entrepreneurial talent to the U.S., which has been declining in recent years.

At Peek Toland & Castañeda PLLC, our experienced business immigration attorneys can help you hire people from overseas or if you are using complex federal investment programs. Call us for a consultation at (512) 474-4445.

Posted in Immigration Reform

Tagged with:

Schools Back Drive for New Sanctuary Campuses

By Peek & Toland on September 28, 2017

More schools are pushing to become sanctuary campuses. However, some administrators fear the creation of sanctuary campuses could make immigrants targets.

A report on U.S. News highlighted a debate at Hood College in Maryland. It described how petitions demanding the school becomes a sanctuary campus are circulating.

It described how one student, José Galarza, asked college administrators to start a discussion about the issue of sanctuary campuses.

The merits of sanctuary camouses are discussed

Students discuss sanctuary campuses

Vice president of finance and treasurer Charles Mann, Provost Debbie Ricker and President Andrea Chapdelaine initiated the debate about what sanctuary status means to colleges and universities.

Hood hosted Janis Judson, chair of the Department of Law and Criminal Justice at Hood. The panel included Andrea Shuford, a Hood graduate and principal attorney at Shuford Immigration Law in Virginia. They took questions and talked what a sanctuary campus is, and what it isn’t.

Most sanctuary campuses are modeled after sanctuary cities, jurisdictions that limit the level of cooperation with government to enforce a wide range of immigration laws.

Judson, a constitutional lawyer, talked about immigration law and which bodies have the powers to set and enforce immigration laws. He pointed out it’s constantly evolving and was an issue which became a battleground for all three branches of federal government in recent years.

Judson said undocumented immigrants are frightened in the current era of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids with an uptick in deportations under the Trump administration.

Shuford advised students at Hood College who may be coming under pressure because of their immigration issues that sanctuary campus status has little meaning. She said the term sanctuary has little basis in law and zero legal status in federal law.

She pointed out limiting the college’s cooperation with law enforcement would not mean assisting or harboring a person who entered the country illegally. Shuford said it means the campus would not actively help law enforcement in detaining the immigrant.

We noted how sanctuary campuses are being set up to assist undocumented immigrants on our blog.

However, there are already moves to reduce funds to sanctuary campuses in the same way as to sanctuary cities.

If you need help with an immigration matter call our experienced Austin, Texas family immigration team at (512) 474-4445.

Posted in Immigration, Immigration Reform

Tagged with:

Illegal Border Crossings from Mexico to the US Fall to a 17 Year Low

By Peek & Toland on September 27, 2017

The new Trump administration promised a tough approach to immigration. That approach may be linked to a fall in the number of undocumented immigrants seeking to cross the U.S. border from Mexico.

A report on BBC said the number of people arrested crossing the border into the US fell to a 17 year low by the spring.

The report noted fewer than 17,000 arrests of undocumented migrants were recorded in March. The figure was the lowest since 2000, according to US Customs and Border Protection.

Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said the decline reflected Trump’s tough stance on immigration in a briefing to Congress.

Illegal border crossings fall

Illegal border crossings decline

Kelly gave the figures in testimony to the Senate Homeland Security Committee in April. He spoke about an “amazing drop” in the number of migrants taking the dangerous route north from Central America.

Kelly said March marked the fifth straight month of declining numbers. The number of migrants arrested at the border is about 71 percent lower than the December 2016 total – 58,478, Kelly said.

He said the trend on illegal immigration was good news but the southern border remained a priority to protect the country from terrorists and other criminals.

In April, a report from the Pew Research Center found the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has now dropped to its lowest level since 2009.

The research found the number of unauthorized immigrants living in the US in 2015 fell below the total at the end of the recession for the first time. The research found Mexicans represented a falling share of this population.

The Pew Research Center report appears to suggest the number of undocumented immigrants coming into the country from Mexico may have been falling before Trump was elected president.

The research found there were 11 million illegal immigrants living in the United States in 2015. It was a small but statistically significant fall from the Center’s estimate of 11.3 million for 2009, the final year of the recession. The Center’s preliminary estimate of the unauthorized immigrant population in 2016 is 11.3 million.


While immigration from Mexico is falling, Undocumented immigration from Asia is rising. Undocumented Asians grew to 1.5 million in 2015 from 1.3 million in 2009.

At Peek Toland & Castañeda PLLC our Austin immigration attorneys can help you with your family immigration matters. Please call us for a consultation at (512) 474-4445.

Posted in Immigration, Immigration Reform

Tagged with:

Trump’s Travel Ban – What the Supreme Court Must Consider

By Peek & Toland on September 23, 2017

President Donald Trump’s Travel Ban is heading to the Supreme Court in October after months of legal hearings. It is likely to be one of the most important cases the new look Supreme Court will decide.

In June, the highest court in the land allowed some parts of the travel ban to go ahead pending its hearing.

The court permitted the ban to go into effect for foreign nationals who lack a “bona fide relationship with any person or entity in the United States.”

In an unsigned opinion the court, left Trump’s travel ban against citizens of six majority-Muslim countries on hold as it related to non-citizens who had relationships with people or entities in the United States. This included most of the plaintiffs’ cases brought against the travel ban.

Examples of formal relationships include employees who accepted a job with a company in the US, and students accepted to universities in the United States, the court said.

Trump's Travel Ban is before the Supreme Court

Trump’s Travel Ban Will be held by the U.S. Supreme Court

The original travel ban caused chaos at airports in January when Trump issued an executive order. That ban was later suspended by the courts. A revised ban removed Iraq from the list of majority Muslim counties it affected and softened some of the other aspects.

Most reports suggest the partial implementation of the travel ban in the summer caused considerably less disruption than the original ban.

In an opinion piece in the Washington Post, Adam Chilton and Genevieve Lakier, assistant professors of law at the University of Chicago Law School outlined the issues the justices will need to get to grips with when they consider the travel ban in October.

The justices will consider whether the president exceeded his constitutional authority.

Chilton and Lakier wrote the justices will have an opportunity to consider the long-standing legal principle known as the “plenary power doctrine.”

The doctrine gives the President of the United States and Congress power to take action over immigration law.

The academics argue the hearing would give the court to seize the opportunity to finally rid the legal system of this “outdated doctrine.”

Plenary power can be traced back to 1889 when the highest court in the land unanimously upheld a law barring Chinese laborers from returning to the United States once they left the country. The case has been used to give very broad discretion to politicians over who should be admitted to the United States.

The plenary power doctrine has led to some questionable decisions. It has been used to bar communists from the United States and to uphold laws that make it more difficult for men than women to pass citizenship on to their kids.

Chilton and Lakier argue the plenary power doctrine is outdated and has been used to justify racist decisions.

They said while the lower courts were concerned that Trump’s travel ban was motivated by anti-Muslim sentiment, they found “creative ways” to argue the ban did not deserve the deference the plenary power doctrine has been given. They concluded:

“It’s easy to understand why: Lower courts do not have the authority to overturn Supreme Court opinions. But the Supreme Court can overturn its own precedents, and it should take this opportunity to squarely reject the plenary power doctrine as both outdated and unnecessary.”

It remains to be seen if the nation’s highest court will overturn this fundamental piece of law.

However, the futures of thousands of people from six countries in the United States hang on the court’s ruling.

If you have been impacted by Trump’s travel ban, it makes sense to talk to an experienced Austin criminal defense lawyer. Call us at (512) 474-4445.

Posted in Immigration, Immigration Reform

Tagged with: ,

Why Federal Detainer Requests Violate the Constitutional Right to Due Process

By Peek & Toland on September 19, 2017

Federal immigration detainer requests have been in the news recently as President Donald Trump moves forward with his agenda to enforce federal laws related to immigrants. But while local governments are under pressure to comply, there are strong arguments that federal detainer requests violate the constitutional right to due process.

By not complying with federal detainer requests, local governments risk being labeled as ‘sanctuary cities’ and losing federal money.

ICE detainers, or “immigration holds” are one of the main tools U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) uses to apprehend people who are picked up by local and state law enforcement agencies and put them into the federal deportation system.

Detainer requests may violate the constitution

ICE detainer requests may not be constitutional

A detainer request is a written request to a local jail or other law enforcement agency to keep an individual for an additional 48 hours after their scheduled release date. This gives ICE agents extra time to make a decision whether to take the individual into federal custody for removal proceedings.

The American Civil Liberties Union is among the organizations warning the use of detainers to imprison people without due process raises constitutional concerns. In many cases, these individuals are held without any charges pending or probable cause of any violation.

In 2014, the Department of Homeland Security acknowledged ICE detainer requests had been held to be contrary to the Fourth Amendment.

The legal concerns have resulted in some jurisdictions saying they will not comply with detainer requests. Travis County is one of the most high-profile jurisdictions to refuse to comply.

A report by Virginia’s TV station found many jurisdictions in the Commonwealth felt unable to comply with the policy.

Ken Stolle, the sheriff of Virginia Beach, said ICE is notified when a non-citizen is picked up by law enforcement and given notice of the inmate’s release date.

Stolle said more inmates are being picked up under the Trump administration but he won’t hold inmates past their release dates.

Gabe Morgan, the sheriff of nearby Newport News said the system would be fixed if detainer requests were signed by a judge or a magistrate like every other warrant.

Last year, a federal district court in the Northern District of Illinois ruled the practice of issuing immigration detainers by ICE was invalid.

The court ruled detainers violate federal law. It said they exceed the government’s warrantless arrest authority. The justices said federal immigration authorities require warrant if they want to take custody of an immigrant held in a local jurisdiction.

In Texas, Governor Greg Abbott has adopted a tough approach, signing legislation to penalize sanctuary cities and threatening to remove sheriffs who refuse to honor detainer requests.

The legality of detainer requests is a pressing concern to us as Austin immigration lawyers. If you need the services of a family immigration lawyer call us at (512) 474-4445.

Posted in Immigration, Immigration Reform

Tagged with: ,

What The Ending of the DACA Program Means to Dreamers

By Peek & Toland on September 15, 2017

Immigrants brought to the United States as children endured a rollercoaster ride in recent months as the future of the DACA program was debated. Although President Trump gave a safeguard about the program four months earlier, he suddenly announced the program would be rescinded this month.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions outlined the decision to end DACA at a press conference at the Justice Department on September 5. He argued that the program, originally created by President Obama, is unconstitutional and was an executive branch overreach.

The Obama administration announced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in 2012, we noted on our website.

The DACA program includes almost 790,000 recipients. Its goal is to permit young people, most of them who lived the majority of their lives in the US, to work and contribute to their communities without fear of deportation.

Under the program, undocumented immigrants under 30, known as “Dreamers” gain the temporary right to live, work and seek education in the United States provided they pass background checks. They do not receive citizenship or legal status.

Four months ago, President Trump indicated the DACA program was safe. However, in August reports surfaced that he was considering scrapping it, noted CNN.

The Department of Homeland Security is providing a six-month window to consider pending requests, reported CBS. It will give Congress the chance to pass a legislative alternative to DACA. This means the program will end at different times for different recipients, expiring on a rolling basis.

Outlining the DACA pogram

THe DACA program is seen as part of the American Dream

For Dreamers, the decision comes as a bitter blow. People who have been in the United States for many years, often since they were young children, face losing the right to contribute to their communities and even the possibility of deportation to their birth nations.

However, there remains uncertainty about what will happen in Congress and the decision will impact different DACA recipients in various ways. The issue took a new twist this week when Trump was reported to be hashing out a DACA deal with Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill that might save aspects of the program.

The main scenarios are as follows according to the CBS article.

  • Initial DACA requests and applications for Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) received as of Sept. 5, the date of the announcement will be adjudicated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on a case-by-case basis.
  • USCIS will automatically reject all initial DACA requests and associated EADs received after Sept. 5.
  • USCIS will adjudicate requests for renewing DACA benefits and associated applications for EADs on an individual, case-by-case basis if received before Sept. 5.
  • Dreamers whose DACA status expires between Sept. 5, 2017, and March 5, 2018, will be eligible for adjudication of renewal requests, but only if documentation is received by Oct. 5, 2017.
  • Individuals whose DACA protection expires on March 6, 2018, or a following date who have not already submitted a renewal application, would be subject to deportation on March 6, 2018, or a later date.
  • USCIS will continue to process lost, stolen or destroyed EADs, to give Dreamers replacement documents for the remainder of the time that they’re valid.

USCIS will close all pending applications for Advance Parole associated with the DACA program. This is a permit allowing a non-citizen to reenter the United States after traveling abroad.

USCIS will honor the validity period of a previously approved Advance Parole. But if a person doesn’t have a previously approved parole application and travels outside the country, his or her departure would automatically terminate their deferred action under DACA.  Customs and Border Protection are unlikely to allow them to re-enter the U.S.

A wide range of legislators, non-profits and other agencies urged Trump not to end DACA, reported USA Today.

In a Facebook post , former president Barack Obama branded Trump’s choice to end the program “cruel,” “wrong” and contrary to common sense.

Trump’s initial stance to retain the DACA program met opposition from Republican states, spearheaded by Texas.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, along with nine other state attorneys, issued an ultimatum to the Trump administration in July, threatening to take legal action. Paxton referred to the failure of the Obama administration to extend DACA after the former president’s executive orders were deadlocked at the U.S. Supreme Court. Paxton wrote:

“The courts blocked DAPA and Expanded DACA from going into effect, holding that the Executive Branch does not have the unilateral power to confer lawful presence and work authorization on unlawfully present aliens simply because the Executive chooses not to remove them.”

The action by Texas put additional pressure on the president to announce a new policy on DACA before a potential court challenge.

Government officials say from August and December, 201,678 people are set to have their DACA and associated EADs expire.  Of this group, 55,258 have requests for renewal pending with USCIS. Next year, more than 275,000 will see their DACA and EADs expire and more than 300,000 in 2019.

Although the government has reiterated its policy that anyone who is illegally in the United States could be deported, DHS officials made it clear criminals who are undocumented will still be the priority for removal.

These are difficult times for the so-called Dreamers in Texas and elsewhere. However, there is still an element of uncertainty about what will happen in Congress. If you need help with an issue related to the DACA program or another issue, please call our experienced Austin family immigration attorneys at (512) 474-4445.

Posted in Deferred Action, Immigration Reform

Tagged with: ,

Sanctuary City Ban is Signed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott

By Peek & Toland on September 7, 2017

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has taken aim at locations like Austin that protect immigrants from federal immigration arrests by signing a bill that amounts to a sanctuary cities ban.

On May 7, the Texas Governor signed a bill that bans sanctuary cities in his state. The main elements of the legislation are:

  • Criminal sanctions against local government entities and police departments that won’t comply with detention requests and other federal immigration provisions.
  • Civil sanctions levied against cities not in compliance.
  • A potential fine of $25,500 for each day the sanctuary cities ban is violated.

A report on CNN noted the legislation can bring a misdemeanor charge for police chiefs, sheriffs and constables in Texas who fail to comply with detention requests.

Sanctuary city ban is signed by Texas governor

Texas governor signs sanctuary city ban

Abbott’s office said these elected and appointed officials can even be removed from office once the measure is imposed on September 1. In a press release, Abbot said:

“As Governor, my top priority is public safety, and this bill furthers that objective by keeping dangerous criminals off our streets. It’s inexcusable to release individuals from jail that have been charged with heinous crimes like sexual assault against minors, domestic violence, and robbery.”

Travis County is the only jurisdiction in Texas with an active policy to resist detainer requests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to hold defendants who may be undocumented immigrants.

Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez told CNN it was unfortunate that misinformation and fear allowed the sanctuary cities ban to pass.

Sanctuary city is a broad term used to describe jurisdictions with policies that limit involvement or cooperation with federal immigration authorities. There is no consistent set of characteristics to describe a sanctuary city. However, cities such as San Francisco and Los Angeles in California have made no secret of their opposition to federal immigration policies and their lack of cooperation.

Many cities, counties and some U.S. states have informal laws and policies that are consistent with sanctuary positions.

Abbott said he vouched for the legality of the law, claiming it has already been tested at the United States Supreme Court.


However, opposition groups pledged to mount a legal challenge. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), immediately pledged to fight the law describing it as a blunder.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas said the legislation will allow racial profiling by untrained immigration agents and is unconstitutional in seeking to remove democratically elected representatives from office if the fail to comply.

The legislation mirrors national action. The Trump administration threatened to remove funding from nine sanctuary city jurisdictions including New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and the State of California.

An article in Kaiser Health News warned programs to fight opioid addiction and domestic violence could be at risk from the measures.

Some police chiefs are in opposition to the sanctuary city ban, claiming it could widen a gap between police and immigrant communities, prevent victims coming forward and stop immigrants from helping them to solve crimes.

Research suggests crime is not any higher in sanctuary cities than other locations.

Peek Toland & Castañeda PLLC can help you with a wide range of immigration matters. Please call us at (512) 474-4445 for help.


Posted in Immigration, Immigration Reform

Tagged with:

Immigration in Houston – Why the City is Becoming More Accepting of Immigrants

By Peek & Toland on September 6, 2017

Immigration in Houston has made for negative headlines in recent years as the city helped immigration authorities round up undocumented migrants.

However, attitudes have changed. Last August, Houston welcomed itself as a “welcoming city” to immigrants and undocumented workers, the Chronicle reported.

The article pointed out the city earned headlines as the place with more resettled immigrant than any other city. It’s a place with a diverse immigrant population that helped reshape the region at a time when Texas is pushing anti-sanctuary city policies.

Immigration in Houston is changing

The Houston skyline

Harris County Sheriff’s Office has been the focus of protests by taking part in a partnership with federal immigration authorities to train a team of deputies to enforce immigration law. Under the program, the deputies would determine the immigration status of suspects in the jails and hold selected inmates for deportation.

However, Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez ended the controversial partnership in February.

The Democrat who took office a month earlier pledged to reassign 10 deputies trained under the 287(g) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement program to other law enforcement duties.

Unlike Travis County, sheriff’s deputies still will cooperate with ICE officials to visit the jail and screen jail inmates to find their immigration status. The county will hold them for potential deportation if requested, Gonzalez said.

Stephen Klineberg, founding director of the Kinder Institute for Urban Research, told the Chronicle, Houston is becoming increasingly welcoming of diversity.

The article said a younger generation of Houston residents has ensured the city is more diverse and comfortable with its cosmopolitan make-up than in the past.

Klineberg, who tracked decades worth of responses to the Kinder Houston Area Survey said many residents already made up their minds to welcome newcomers, rather than changing their attitudes over time.

The survey seeks the opinions of Houston residents on a range of pertinent issues every year.

They are asked whether immigration strengthens or threatens American culture and whether undocumented immigrants without criminal records should gain a pathway to citizenship. Klineberg said Houstonians became increasingly positive in their attitudes.

At Peek Toland & Castañeda PLLC we are well aware of the positive benefits of immigration. We help new arrivals to remain and make a meaningful contribution to the United States. We have an office in Houston where we can meet clients by appointment only.

Find out more about our immigration practice through our FAQs. Or call us at (512) 474-4445.


Posted in Cancellation of Removal, Immigration, Immigration Reform

Immigration in Bastrop is a Concern with Residents

By Peek & Toland on September 4, 2017

Immigration in Bastrop is a concern amid clampdowns across Texas by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, a recent town hall meeting heard.

The town hall in February heard concerns that the roundups that are targeting undocumented immigrants with criminal records could impact Bastrop as a community.  The fears of residents at a town hall meeting earlier this year were reported in The Statesman.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (USCIS) officers started rounding up unauthorized immigrants in Austin in February. The Washington Post noted how hundreds of undocumented immigrants were picked up in half a dozen states. The raids followed President Trump’s executive order of Jan. 25 to crack down on about 11 million immigrants living illegally in the United States.

A federal judge in Texas later appeared to note the raids were aimed at so-called “sanctuary cities,” that provide more protections for undocumented immigrants reported CNN.

Immigration in Bastrop was discussed at a recent meeting

At the town hall meeting, Bastrop County Precinct 1 Commissioner Mel Hamner said he understood the nervousness in the Hispanic community. He warned the raid threatened to undermine the fabric of the community. He said.

“It’s their friends and neighbors, family members. The Hispanic community has the right to be nervous about all this because things that have kind of been in place for decades could be unraveled by all that.”

Many immigrant families have lived in the Lake Bastrop Acres neighborhood for decades. At the meeting, LBA residents voiced concerns that immigrants who are part of their community will be rounded up. A similar concern was heard from residents in the Stony Point neighborhood in Del Valle which also has a sizeable Hispanic population.

Immigration in Bastrop and Crime Takes Center Stage

Crime in Bastrop was also highlighted as a concern during the town hall.

Hamner said he saw criminal activity at first-hand when he lived on Matthews Cove at the end of Pershing Boulevard. Residents said they had seen blatant drug dealing and felt unsafe in their homes.

The town hall meeting in February was the first to be held for residents in the Lake Bastrop Acres and Camp Swift neighborhoods to the north of Bastrop.

The Statesman reported 33 violent crimes occurred in the Camp Swift and LBA neighborhoods in the six months until February, according to The site garners report from the Bastrop County sheriff’s office. The crimes listed sexual assault, assault, and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Hamner said he has requested the additional officers posted in the neighborhood. The meeting heard 10 homicides occurred on the Bastrop-Travis County in just four months.

If you have a concern about immigration in Bastrop, round-ups by ICE agents or crime, please call our experienced Bastrop immigration and defense attorneys for a consultation at (512) 474-4445.


Posted in Criminal Defense, Immigration, Immigration Reform

Tagged with: ,