ACLU highlights little-known rapid deportations

Maria de la Paz was born in 1984 at Jefferson Davis hospital in Houston, Texas. She was one of nearly 3.7 million babies born in the United States that year. Even though her parents were born in Mexico, she was born a U.S. citizen - which under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. constitution affords her the same rights as the other 3.7 million newborns in 1984.

Maria lived in the U.S. until she was four months old and then she moved to Mexico. Leaving the U.S. at such a young age -- she never learned English. This created a language barrier that ultimately led to her deportation as an adult. After a Customs and Border Protection officer determined she was lying about her age and citizenship -- she was deported. She was not provided a lawyer and there was no trial.

Last week the ACLU released a report regarding a little known process that takes place when immigrants reach the border -- rapid deportation, the process that took place when Maria was unable to convince a CBP officer of her U.S. citizenship. When immigrants attempt to cross the border into the U.S. immigration officers then determine the validity of their documents. If they come to the conclusion that an immigrant cannot lawfully enter the country, the the immigrant is sent back across the border almost instantaneously. These individuals are expelled without a trial - their fate is in the hands of the officer.

When Maria was 18, she was attempting to travel from Mexico to the U.S., when a CBP officer stopped her at a U.S. port of entry. She presented officials with her birth certificate and personal documentation establishing that she was a U.S. citizen - but wasn't able converse in English. The officer was in disbelief that a U.S. citizen could only speak Spanish. They accused her of lying about her age, declared she was a minor - even though she was 18 - and deemed her documentation fraudulent. She says she was pressured into signing papers that indicated the identifying documents she presented officers with were a sham.

"I knew what these documents said but I felt as if I was given no other option but to sign them," Maria told CBS News.

Maria was detained for six hours. Her personal documents were confiscated and an expedited removal was issued -- sending her back to Mexico. Maria did not have access to a lawyer. She was forced to leave a country in which she legally belonged.

While immigration advocates are cheering President Obama's executive action that would shield nearly five million undocumented immigrants from deportation, the action will do nothing to preclude rapid deportations.

Reforming what many politicians have called the United States' "broken" immigration system has been a challenge. President Obama's executive order came after a Republican-led House failed to vote on a bipartisan Senate bill designed to enact comprehensive immigration reform.

In July 2013, House Speaker John Boehner stated, "I've made it clear and I'll make it clear again, the House does not intend to take up the Senate bill. The House is going to do its own job in developing an immigration bill." But the House failed to create an alternative.

The President's plan intends to prioritize the deportation of recent arrivals and criminals over those who have been dwelling peacefully within the U.S. for at least five years, especially those who have children with U.S. citizenship.

"If you meet the criteria, you can come out of the shadows and get right with the law," President Obama said. "If you're a criminal, you'll be deported. If you plan to enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up."

Last week the ACLU released a report on rapid deportations - highlighting an area in which the President's plan falls short.

"President Obama's executive action can help free up the over-burdened court system so that people who are left out but have claims can finally be heard," Sarah Metha - ACLU Human Rights Researcher - told CBS News. "However, in prioritizing "border" removals, the Administration is going full-speed ahead with the deeply flawed deportation practices at the border without first addressing the need for reform and accountability."

Summary removal procedures or return processes can result in seemingly instantaneous deportations. These immigrants are deported through an administrative process where an immigration officer acts as the residing "prosecutor, judge, and jailer," according to the ACLU. In fiscal year 2013, 438, 421 deportations took place in the U.S. In more than 363, 279 of those deportations - approximately 83 percent - the individuals being removed never saw the inside of a courtroom, the ACLU reports.

There are a few types of summary removals that skip the courtroom. But two processes in particular -- "expedited removals" and "reinstatement of removal" -- account for the majority of these orders.

Reinstatement orders - accounting for 39 percent of deportations - are issued when previously deported immigrants attempt to reenter the country without permission. Approximately 44 percent of deportations occur in the form of an "expedited removal," a process that allows DHS officers to expel individuals from the country upon their determination that non-citizens lack proper documentation.

The ACLU explains that even people living in the country for many years, parents of children that are U.S. citizens, asylum seekers and, in certain circumstances, even U.S. citizens have been rapidly deported.

CBS News contacted the Department of Homeland Security in regards to the ACLU report. They provided us with a statement in regards to the procedures it addressed.

"Individuals in DHS custody maintain important rights and due process protections throughout the course of their proceedings and DHS strives to ensure that these individuals are only removed after any claims for relief from removal, including asylum, are fully evaluated," the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.

"DHS remains focused on smart and effective immigration enforcement that prioritizes the removal of convicted criminals, recent and repeat border crossers. When an undocumented immigrant is apprehended at the border, the U.S. Border Patrol applies consequences based on criminal and immigration history, while at the same time taking into account compelling humanitarian factors."

Summary removal procedures may seem like a quick fix when dealing with undocumented immigrants trying to enter the country illegally but they can also result in errors - like what happened to Maria.

After she was forced to return to Mexico she tried to obtain a passport from the U.S Embassy - but the Embassy was requesting more evidence and her efforts were ultimately unsuccessful.

She had already coaxed her into signing documents stating her real birth certificate was phony. Running out of options, she hopped on a boat alongside a few truly undocumented immigrants and attempted to make her way across the border. The journey came to an abrupt halt after she was approached by Border Patrol agents, detained again for two days, and sent back to Mexico.

"I felt very let down and frustrated to be laughed at and mocked. I wasn't being treated like a person," she said. "No one talked to me like a person."

During her detainment Maria struggled to grapple with the language barrier that had--once again - kept her out of her own country. When Maria was detained she tried to reach out to her family in the U.S. but wasn't allowed to make a single phone call. She was told she did not have this right - when in fact - she had all of the very same rights as the individual who detained her.

Eventually, with the help from her attorney, Jaime Diez, Maria's case went to trial. Shortly after the courts recognized the error made at the border and she was issued new documentation.

"Once the case went to trial, it only took four months. They recognized the error right away," Diez says.