[1][4] In November 2011, it was reported that the use of stipulated removal in Arizona (including the Eloy Detention Center) had stopped after the changes triggered by the Ramos case.
[7] A review of stipulated removal by the Stanford Law School noted: "The government targets undocumented individuals for stipulated removal while they are in immigration detention, most likely because they cannot afford to post thousands of dollars in bond money to obtain release from detention.
If these individuals were able to post bond, they could continue to challenge their removal cases instead of simply accepting deportation.
They have also argued that the program has adequate safeguards to make sure that people with a legal basis to stay in the United States are not subject to stipulated removal.
She has also been critical of the changes to the program after the Ramos decision, noting that offering stipulated removal only to immigrants who hire their own lawyers bogs down the judicial process and defeats the purpose of the program: to quickly remove illegal immigrants with no legal grounds to remain in the U.S. who want to go home.