Immigration News

Associate Attorney Rebecca Kutlow and UCLA Law Professor Ingrid Eagly recently published an opinion piece in the SF Chronicle about the representation of noncitizens in the criminal enforcement system in California. The opinion piece was based off of a study that was recently published in the Stanford Law Review. Ms. Kutlow, Ms. Eagly, and two of their colleagues, Tali Gires and Eliana Navarro Gracian conducted an empirical study of the services and resources available in California’s 58 counties for representing noncitizen individuals in criminal proceedings. The study researched the implementation of a supreme court case, Padilla v. Kentucky, in California’s public defense system and looked at how indigent noncitizen defendants are being represented. As the opinion piece explains, “In our research, we found that most counties in the state have not yet hired any immigration experts, severely compromising their ability to effectively represent noncitizens. And though some large counties, like […]

Read More

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) has changed its policy regarding the 3 and 10 year bars of inadmissibility under INA section 212(a)(9)(B). Previously, when someone triggered these bars by departing from the United States after accruing more than six months of unlawful presence, USCIS stated that they had to spend the requisite 3 or 10 years outside of the United States before they could apply for admission. Now, however, USCIS has changed its policy so that the requisite 3 or 10 year time periods run regardless of whether the individual returns to the United States or remains abroad. This change could allow many individuals to apply for immigration benefits without needing to apply for a waiver of inadmissibility or remain abroad for the requisite time. Read full policy manual guidance here.

Read More

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) has updated its policy regarding whether travel while on TPS is an admission and inspection for purposes of adjustment of status. Previously, USCIS had a policy in place under Matter of Z-R-Z-C-, which stated that if a TPS beneficiary travelled with advance parole, they were not “inspected and admitted” upon return for the purposes of adjustment of status. However, USCIS will now issue a new TPS travel authorization document, rather than an advance parole document, which will allow TPS beneficiaries to travel abroad and return to the United States. Upon return with this new document, they will be considered to have been “inspected and admitted” for the purposes of adjustment of status. In some instances, individuals who previously travelled with advance parole while the Matter of Z-R-Z-C- policy was in place, may be eligible for adjustment of status as well. Read full policy […]

Read More

On June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration had the authority to reverse and stop the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) which was put into place by the Trump administration. Under MPP, some individuals seeking asylum are forced to remain in Mexico while they await their court date in front of an immigration judge in the United States. The Biden administration previous tried to stop this practice, but their efforts were halted by a district court judge in Texas. The Supreme Court has no overturned that lower court’s decision, and stated that the Biden administration does have the authority to reverse MPP and stop sending asylum seekers back to Mexico while their proceedings are pending Read full article here.

Read More

Great news for asylum seekers – as of February 7, 2022, the Rosario class has been fully restored. In this certified nationwide class action filed in the federal court for the Western District of Washington, asylum applicants whose initial applications for employment authorization documents (EADs) were not adjudicated within the 30-day period required by regulation (8 C.F.R. § 208.7(a)(1)) sought a court order compelling U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to comply with the regulatory timeframe. Following summary judgment briefing by both parties, the court ruled in Plaintiffs’ favor on July 26, 2018. The court ordered USCIS to follow the law and timely adjudicate initial EAD asylum applications. Nearly two years later, on June 22, 2020, the government published a new rule eliminating the 30-day processing deadline for initial asylum EAD applications. Removal of 30-day Processing Provision for Asylum Applicant-Related Form I-765 Employment Authorization Applications Rule, 85 Fed. Reg. 37,502 […]

Read More

The Department of Homeland Security announced that it has designated Temporary Protective Status for 18 months for individuals from Ukraine who have been physically present in the U.S. since March 1, 2022. This means that Ukrainian nationals can submit an application for TPS to obtain temporary status, and work authorization, in the United States for 18 months. Read the full article here.

Read More

On January 11, 2022, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Garland v. Aleman Gonzalez. The case is a class action lawsuit, and attorneys at Van Der Hout LLP, including Marc Van Der Hout, Johnny Sinodis, and Rebecca Kutlow, are part of the team representing individuals in the Aleman Gonzalez class. So far in the case, our arguments have won in the courts. Under the current injunction affirmed in the Ninth Circuit, class members can obtain an individualize bond hearing with an immigration judge after being detained for 180 days. Class members who get this right to a hearing include noncitizens who are subject to final administrative orders of removal and have live claims pending before an administrative or judicial adjudicative body (for example, those applying for withholding of removal or CAT only). We hope that the Supreme Court will agree, and allow those bond hearings to continue. Now that […]

Read More

Beginning November 8, 2021, the current US COVID-19 travel restrictions banning most travel from Europe, Brazil, India, China, Iran and South Africa will be replaced with new requirements for all international air travelers, regardless of their country of departure. On October 25, 2021, the White House provided information describing how the program will be implemented and which travelers will be impacted by the new rules. These policies will be implemented by airline staff, who will have to determine which travelers have met the requirements at the time of travel. The new rules will go into effect on November 8 at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time. The rules will apply to persons aboard a flight scheduled to arrive in the United States that departs after 12:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time on November 8, 2021. Foreign nationals must be fully vaccinated to travel to the United States by plane unless they are […]

Read More

Hundreds of American businesses who had their H-1B petitions denied for market research analysts may receive a second chance for approval, thanks to a recent settlement in a class action lawsuit. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) denied these petitions because the agency determined market research analysts were not a “specialty occupation,” a requirement for an H-1B visa classification. USCIS came to this decision based on a flawed reading of the “market research analysts” entry in the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook. The settlement provides a mechanism for qualifying U.S. employers to request reopening and re-adjudication of their denied H-1B petitions. It also requires USCIS to issue new guidance regarding the adjudication of class members’ previously denied H-1B petitions, as well as market research analyst petitions currently pending and filed in the future. The lawsuit was filed by the American Immigration Council, the American Immigration […]

Read More

Yesterday, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 1259 which extends California penal code § 1473.7 to trial convictions. The bill will be effective as of January 1, 2022. Prior to the signing of AB 1259, § 1473.7 allowed a person who was no longer in criminal custody to file a motion to vacate their conviction or sentence because they did not meaningfully understand the immigration consequences of a guilty plea or plea of nolo contendere. AB 1259 changes § 1473.7 so that anyone who has any conviction or sentence, whether through a plea or through trial, can file a motion to vacate under § 1473.7. This means that individuals who proceeded to trial, rather than agreeing to a plea, may now be eligible to vacate a prior conviction if they can show that they did not have the ability to meaningfully understand, defend against or knowing accept the actual or […]

Read More

Given the crisis occurring in Afghanistan many people are seeking help and support for friends and family members. Here are two links from organizations that provide helpful information about the current situation and the different humanitarian pathways that are currently available for Afghans trying to come to the United States. Resources for Assisting Afghan Clients | AILA Legal Resources for Afghans | IRAP

Read More

ICE has issued new guidance stating that it will exercise prosecutorial discretion in appropriate circumstances in cases that involve immigrants who have been granted, or are applying for, immigration benefits designed to help victims of crime. The policy explicitly covers U visas, T visas, VAWA and SIJS, but it is not exclusive to those types of benefits. Under the policy, ICE will, absent “exceptional circumstances,” refrain from detaining or arresting individuals who have approved or pending applications for this type of benefit. The goal of the policy is to create a more victim-centered approach to investigation and prosecution. Read full article here.

Read More

Oakland, CA – Today, a federal district court judge in Oakland, California, approved a final settlement in the case of Vangala v. USCIS, providing relief to over sixty thousand applicants for humanitarian immigration benefits. The lawsuit, filed on November 19, 2020, against U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), challenged an agency policy adopted under the Trump administration specifically targeting humanitarian benefits for survivors of domestic violence and human trafficking and asylum seekers. Under the policy, USCIS rejected applications that left any question in the application unanswered, even where the question was not applicable—for example where the applicant failed to include a response for middle name because they have no middle name. Additionally, USCIS rejected applications where the applicant wrote “none” or “not applicable” instead of “N/A.” The lawsuit was filed by Northwest Immigrant Rights Project (NWIRP), the National Immigration Litigation Alliance (NILA), and the Van Der Hout law firm, on […]

Read More

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, the Aleman Gonzalez litigation team received inquiries from practitioners as to the status of the preliminary injunction ordered by the court on June 5, 2018, and later clarified on July 20, 2018. The Aleman injunction remains intact and is the law throughout the Ninth Circuit. After 180 days in custody, the government must still provide an individualized bond hearing to noncitizens who are subject to final administrative orders of removal, are held in detention under INA § 241(a)(6), and who have live claims pending before an administrative or judicial adjudicative body. Noncitizens who fit that criteria are entitled to release from custody unless the government establishes, by clear and convincing evidence, that they are a flight risk or a danger to the community. Determining whether someone is a class member can often be tricky, and the class is not limited […]

Read More

A federal judge issued an order blocking new applications for DACA from being approved. The order, however, does not currently effect individuals whose applications have already been approved. Judge Andrew Hannan agreed with the groups of states that sued to end DACA and stated that DACA was illegally created by the former President Obama in 2012. “He said the government could continue to receive new applications to the program, as ordered by a federal judge in a separate case, but that it could not approve them.” Read full article here.

Read More

The Salvadoran woman, Ms. A.B., who was at the center of the Trump administration’s attack on asylum for domestic violence survivors was finally granted asylum by the Board of Immigration Appeals. After Attorney General Merrick Garland vacated Jeff Sessions’ prior decision from 2018, the government agreed to a grant of Ms. A.B.’s case. “Garland’s decision to vacate Matter of A-B- struck down Sessions’ restrictive precedent, ensuring that his ruling could no longer be used to prejudge – and wrongly deny – asylum cases. Today’s grant of asylum to Ms. A.B. ends the agonizing, years-long legal limbo she has endured at the hands of Trump’s Justice Department.” The Department of Justice and Homeland Security are currently drafting regulations providing guidelines as how to cases, like Ms. A.B.’s, should be decided in the future. Read full article here.

Read More

On Thursday, Attorney General Garland issued a ruling that will allow immigration judges to once again postpone deportation cases when appropriate. Since at least the 1980s, immigration judges relied on their authority to administratively close cases, but it was eliminated by the Trump administration. Judges typically use this authority to postpone cases where the individual in the case has a pending application for relief before the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, such as a U visa. “Garland in a four-page opinion said Sessions’ 2018 ruling in Matter of Castro-Tum, which has been rejected by three federal appeals courts, improperly parted from decades of practice by concluding that no federal law or regulation authorized so-called “administrative closure.” Garland said that because administrative closure does not terminate or dismiss deportation cases, it is an appropriate tool for immigration judges to manage their busy dockets.” Read full article here.

Read More

We are thrilled to report about Vangala v. USCIS, the lawsuit brought by attorneys at Van Der Hout LLP, National Immigration Litigation Alliance (NILA), and Northwest Immigrants’ Rights Project (NWIRP), challenging the Blank Spaces policy that affected over 60,000 asylum applications and U visa petitions during the final period of the Trump administration. The parties entered into a settlement agreement, filed July 6, 2021, with the federal district court for approval. The settlement will not be final and effective until the district court approves it. In summary, the primary points of the settlement establish that: Anybody who has had their I-589 or I-918 applications (and applications/petitions related to the I-918) rejected pursuant to the No Blank Spaces rejection policy will be able to recapture the date of the original filing and this date will control for all purposes, including determining eligibility for derivative relationships, aging out, the one-year deadline for […]

Read More

On June 14, 2021 USCIS announced that it would begin to issue employment authorization documents for individuals who have a bona fide pending U visa application. Work authorization will be issued both for principal and derivative applicants. The policy applies to all U visa applications (Form I-918) that were pending on June 14, 2021 and those that are filed on or after that date. In order to be eligible for work authorization under this policy, the applicant’s filed application must include Form I-918, Form I-918B, and a signed statement by the applicant. USCIS must also have received the biometrics from the principal applicant. USCIS will then review the applicant’s background check to determine if the individual poses a national security or public safety risk, and to analyze any other relevant discretionary factors. If USCIS finds that the U visa petition is bona fide, it will issue a 4-year employment authorization […]

Read More

The Biden Administration announced an expansion to the Central American Minors Program which will allow many children from Central America to lawfully enter the United States and be reunited with parents. “The Central American Minors program, started by the Obama administration in 2014, applies to people under the age of 21 coming from the so-called Northern Triangle countries of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, which over the past decade have sent a majority of asylum-seeking migrants to the U.S.-Mexico border.” Under the Obama administration, children were eligible for the program if they had a parent living lawfully in the U.S., such as those who were lawful permanent residents or those who had been granted temporary protection. The Biden administration, however, has expanded the program to also include children who have a parent in the United States with a pending visa application or asylum case. Read full article here.

Read More

Borderless Magazine has published an article about the long delay in processing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. This delay has been a problem for noncitizens for many years. Individuals need access to the information in their A-files, which are a critical resource in immigration courts and can help them defend themselves against removal from the United States. The article discusses the Nightingale class action lawsuit, Nightingale v. USCIS, which was filed in 2019 to prevent future delays in FOIA request responses. Van Der Hout Partner Zachary Nightingale is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. In December 2020, a district court judge, William Orrick III ruled that “DHS, USCIS and ICE must adhere to the FOIA deadline; make determinations on all A-File FOIA requests in the departments’ backlog within 60 days; and provide quarterly compliance reports, with the first report due 90 days from the judge’s ruling.” In February 2021, […]

Read More

DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has ordered ICE to sever contracts with the Bristol County Sheriff’s Office in Massachusetts and with the Irwin County Detention Center in rural Georgia. This means that immigrants will no longer be detained in these facilities. Both county jails are under federal investigation for complaints of abuses against immigrants. Silky Shah, executive director of Detention Watch Network called the closings “an important win for the immigrant rights movement.” She said, “Immigrant lives are in jeopardy anytime they are in ICE custody, and we will continue to press the Biden administration to cut detention contracts, release people from ICE custody, and shut down detention centers for good.” Read full article here.

Read More

The state department has announced that it will now approve U.S. citizenship for children born abroad to American parents via in vitro fertilization, surrogacy and by other assisted reproductive means. This policy reverses a long-standing rule that considered children born outside the U.S. to a surrogate to be born “out of wedlock” and that required that the child born abroad have a genetic or gestational relationship to the U.S. citizen parent. The new policy is a huge victory for the many LGBTQ families who have actively fought this policy in court. Read full article here.

Read More

USCIS recently announced that starting on May 17, 2021, biometrics will not be necessary for certain applicants who file Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status. This new rule applies to applicants requesting a change of status to H-4, L-2 or E-1, E-2 or E-3 nonimmigrant status. The suspension of biometrics for these applications will apply through May 17, 2023. This rule will apply to Forms I-539 in the above-mentioned categories that are pending as of May 17, 2021, and have not yet received a biometric service appointment notice or new applications submitted on or after May 17, 2021. Read full article here.

Read More

On May 14, 2021 President Biden revoked a proclamation that was signed by then-President Trump in 2019 that “prevented immigrants from obtaining visas unless they proved they could obtain health insurance or pay for health care.” In his proclamation, President Biden noted that the Healthcare Insurance Order “does not advance the interests of the United States.” President Biden stated that his administration “is committed to expanding access to quality, affordable healthcare” and that they could “achieve that objective, however, without barring the entry of noncitizens who seek to immigrate lawfully to this country but who lack significant financial means or have not purchased health insurance coverage from a restrictive list of qualifying plans.” Read full article here.

Read More

President Biden welcomed six recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program on Friday to the Oval Office. This is just the second known gathering of DACA recipients in the Oval Office. The Biden administration continues to signal that his immigration reform plan remains a legislative priority. Along with a plan to extend citizenship to more than 11 million undocumented immigrants, President Biden has also encouraged Congress to act to secure protections for DACA beneficiaries. Read full article here.

Read More

On April 29, 2021, the Supreme Court issued an important decision that could allow many individuals to seek relief from removal proceedings that was previously unavailable to them. “The justices decided that federal immigration law requires authorities to include all relevant details for a notice to appear for a hearing in one document rather than sending the information across multiple documents. While a technical issue, the ruling could affect hundreds of thousands of immigration cases.” The Department of Homeland Security, for years, has issued notices to appear for individuals in removal proceedings that leave out certain information, such as the date and location of the immigration hearing. Many forms of relief require that the individual show that they have been in the United States for a certain number of years. Previously, any notice to appear issued by the government would stop the counting of that time. The Court’s decision, however, […]

Read More

President Biden called on Congress to pass his proposal to reform the U.S. immigration system during his address to a joint-session of Congress. The president plans to push a bill his administration passed earlier this year that includes a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. “As part of his address Wednesday, Biden will also call for lawmakers to pass targeted, smaller portions of his immigration agenda if possible, according to the Post, which reported that he will urge the Senate to move on House-passed bills expanding a path to citizenship for ‘Dreamers,’ or those who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children, as well as one that would extend legal status to undocumented farmworkers.” Read full article here.

Read More

On April 7, 2021, New York Times Magazine published an article that places the current Central American human rights disaster in a historical framework of decades of U.S. military intervention. It also links the civil wars in Central American countries and the U.S. sanctuary movement and ABC lawsuit in the 1980s with current ongoing lawsuits about the more recent administrations’ handling of TPS and asylum. Throughout the article, two lawsuits are discussed at length. First, in the 1980s, asylum applications from Central American countries were being almost entirely denied while asylum applications from other countries were being granted at much higher rates. Because of this “perversion of the asylum process” some churches and synagogues “decided to help Salvadorans and Guatemalans enter and remain in the United States illegally.” However, many supporters of this sanctuary movement started being criminally prosecuted for their work. “The lawsuit American Baptist Churches et al. v. […]

Read More

USCIS has implemented a new process extending green cards during the pendency of an I-90 application. Instead of issuing extension stickers at USCIS field offices, USCIS will issue a revised receipt notice for Form I-90 that extends the validity of green card for 12 months (12 months from the expiration date on the front of the green card). This change in policy eliminates the need for permanent residents to request and appear at an InfoPass appointment to obtain an extension sticker. More importantly, the change provides permanent residents who have pending applications with documentary evidence of employment authorization, authorization to travel, and identity. The extension sticker will still be required for those who already filed their I-90 applications and who have already been scheduled for biometrics notices; these individuals will be given the sticker when they appear for their appointments. Those few permanent residents who already attended biometrics appointments before […]

Read More

In January 2021, a 9-year-old boy was held in government custody for about nine days after being separated from his older brother while trying to enter the U.S. The 9-year-old, Vladimir Fardin, landed with his 19-year-old brother at San Francisco International Airport on January 17, 2021. After taking away their visas, U.S. immigration officers deported the 19-year-old to Haiti and put Vladimir into the custody of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). Attorneys from Van Der Hout, LLP fought for Vladimir’s release and return to his family. The government claimed that they had to hold him in custody for 14 days to quarantine before he could be released. Attorneys Marc Van Der Hout and Johnny Sinodis considered this an absurd policy, since Vladimir was not intending to stay in the United States. As Marc Van Der Hout stated, “This is a 9-year-old […]

Read More

Today, immigration advocates filed a national class action lawsuit against U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) challenging a new agency policy, which has resulted in the rejection of thousands of applications filed by vulnerable immigrants. The lawsuit alleges that the agency rolled out the new rule by specifically targeting humanitarian benefits provided by Congress, including those for survivors of domestic violence and human trafficking; asylum seekers; and children who have been abandoned, abused, or neglected. Under the new policy, USCIS rejects applications that have any blank response field, even where the question is not applicable—for example where the applicant fails to include a response for middle name because they have no middle name. In many cases, USCIS’ implementation of the new rule has led to rejections even where the applicant did include responses in all of fields, as in one of the named Plaintiffs’ cases. Additionally, the rule is so […]

Read More

DHS published a new public charge rule that dramatically changes the standard of whether an applicant for admission to the U.S. or for adjustment of status is likely to become a “public charge.” “Public charge” is not defined in the immigration law, but since 1999, the term has meant a person who is or is likely to become “primarily dependent” on “public cash assistance for income maintenance” or “institutionaliz[ed] for long-term care at government expense.” The rule takes effect on October 15, 2019 (see below), unless lawsuits already filed enjoin its implementation. The rule is significant and is expected to result in an increase of denials for both immigrants and nonimmigrants. It is expected to deter persons from seeking benefits for which they are eligible, even if they are exempt from this public charge rule, because of the fear it could disqualify them for permanent residency or a visa. Specifically, the rule affects persons […]

Read More

It seems like every month the Administration comes up with yet another way to restrict the ability of asylum seekers to obtain protection from persecution in order to deter the flow of refugees. On April 29, President Trump issued a memorandum ordering changes to U.S. asylum policies. The memo orders the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to propose regulations within 90 days that would: Require asylum seekers to pay a fee to apply for protection. Require applicants to pay a fee to apply for work authorization for the first time. (Right now, asylum applicants — who must wait 180 days before qualifying for work authorization — can apply for their initial period of work authorization without paying a fee but are required to pay for subsequent renewals.) Place people who have shown a credible or reasonable fear of being persecuted or tortured into limited removal proceedings that […]

Read More

On October 10, USCIS published a proposed rule that would expand the definition of “Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds,” which is intended to determine whether a foreign national is inadmissible because he or she is likely at any time to become a public charge. Having received cash benefits from the United State is currently a consideration in this equation. However, under the proposed rule, an individual having received noncash benefits, including Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), housing vouchers, or rent subsidies could potentially be considered a “public charge.” The proposed rule cites that individuals, not their family members, who receive one or more of these benefits with a combined value of at least 15 percent of federal poverty guidelines (i.e., roughly $1,800 a year, or $150 a month) could be deemed a “public charge.” These are benefits for which foreign nationals are eligible, but now it appears they will be penalized […]

Read More

USCIS has reminded F-1 students whose cap-subject H-1B petition remains pending that they risk accruing unlawful presence if they continued to work on or after October 1 (unless otherwise authorized to continue employment), as their “cap-gap” work authorization was only valid through September 30. While USCIS regulations allow an F-1 student who is the beneficiary of a timely filed H-1B cap-subject petition requesting a change of status to H-1B on October 1 to have his or her F-1 status and any current employment authorization extended through September 30, the regulations do not provide for “cap-gap” work authorization beyond September 30. Clearly, the regulations contemplated that USCIS would adjudicate all affected cases before October 1 to avoid a gap in employment. But, because USCIS has not yet adjudicated all cap-subject H-1B change-of-status petitions for all F-1 students, some beneficiaries will have to stop working. Such F-1 students generally may remain in […]

Read More

Effective October 1, USCIS began implementing its policy of referring cases to the immigration court through the issuance of a Notice to Appear (NTA) on denied status-impacting applications, thus increasing its enforcement actions to a whole host of cases that normally are not automatically referred for proceedings. Service of the NTA provides a foreign national with notice that deportation proceedings are being initiated and that they are now under the jurisdiction of the immigration courts. Although USCIS had had longstanding authority to issue “referral NTAs” to ICE, USCIS exercised this authority sparingly and only in specific situations. Not any more. In announcing the implementation of its new policy, USCIS makes clear that it will be taking an incremental approach; in other words, it will not be referring all cases to ICE. Here is a summary of how USCIS expects to implement the new policy and some procedural considerations: This initial […]

Read More

At the same time that immigration judges are having their discretion restricted, USCIS adjudicators are having their discretion expanded. The governing regulations explicitly provide an adjudicator the discretion to deny a case outright if the record does not establish eligibility for the immigration benefit, or issue a Request for Evidence (RFE) or Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) to further develop the record. However, the previous policy directed that an adjudicator should issue an RFE unless there was “no possibility” that the deficiency could be cured by the submission of additional evidence, thereby limiting the discretion of adjudicators to an extent. Read More Immigrant Rights Organizations File Complaint With DHS Over Coercive and Illegal Tactics

Read More

Of the more than 2,500 children who were separated from their parents due to the Trump Administration’s “zero tolerance” policy on border crossers, close to 550 children have yet to be reunified and an estimated 463 of their parents are no longer in the United States. In the wake of this disastrous policy, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and the American Immigration Council filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General and Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. The lawsuit details coercive tactics used by government officials, including case examples and original testimony from separated parents that document a pervasive and illegal practice by DHS officials of strong-arming mothers and fathers into signing documents they may not have understood, ostensibly waiving their legal rights, including their right to be reunified with their children. These tactics, according to AILA and the Council, impeded these parents’ […]

On June 26, the Supreme Court issued its much anticipated decision, upholding President Trump’s September 24, 2017 Proclamation (“Travel Ban 3.0”), which currently excludes nationals from seven countries, stating that the proclamation was “squarely within the scope of Presidential authority under the INA.” (Trump v. Hawaii, 6/26/18). The travel ban includes restrictions against five majority-Muslim nations — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. North Korea and Venezuela are also on the list. Three other majority-Muslim nations (Chad, Iraq, and Sudan) were removed since the policy was first implemented through Executive Order in January 2017.   The Court rejected the constitutional challenge to the ban. Applying deference to the President despite the evidence presented, the Court explained that it would “uphold the policy so long as it can reasonably be understood to result from a justification independent of unconstitutional grounds.” The court then concluded, based on the record in the case, that the ban […]

USCIS announced that EB-5 investors filing I-829 applications and marriage-based petitioners who file I-751 applications to remove the conditions on their green cards will be able to use the receipt notice as evidence of continued status for 18 months past the expiration date on their conditional green card. This increased validity period (up from 12 months) is the result of increased processing times for these petitions.

Read More

June 26, 2018 The processing times listed on the USCIS website now show a range of expected completion dates as opposed to a concrete date. For example, change-of-status applications (I-539) filed at the Vermont Service Center for the H-4 category show processing times of 10.5 to 13.5 months. This “cycle time” indicates that 50 percent of these cases are adjudicated within 9.5 months, and 93 percent are adjudicated within 13.5 months. Other types of applications and petitions have greater ranges, sometimes because these cases are handled by one of the numerous field offices, which vary considerably in efficiency and speed. Cycle times for naturalization applications are 10 to 19 months; employment-based green card applications have a cycle times of 8.5 to 22 months.   USCIS is currently proceeding with naturalization applications in the order that they were filed, but about 10 percent of cases (likely selected at random) are being […]

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is required to present an annual report of the number of foreign nationals who are admitted but overstay. Overstays are defined as (1) individuals for whom no departure has been recorded and are likely still in the U.S., and (2) individuals who have a recorded departure after their lawful period of admission expired. DHS is currently able to track overstays from all air and sea entries (excluding C and D visa holders) but does not have data for land entries from Canada and Mexico. The report for FY2016 indicated that over 98 percent of the 50,437,278 nonimmigrants admitted via air and sea ports in FY2016 departed the United States on time and abided by the terms of their admission.   However, some visa categories are more prone to overstaying than others. For example, the report notes that of the 1,457,556 foreign students expected to depart in […]

Read More

Changes and enhancements to immigration enforcement measures continue to develop at a breathtakingly rapid pace. Currently front and center is the Administration’s separation of family members on the southern border, which has finally pushed the border wall from the spotlight. Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ “zero-tolerance” policy for illegal border crossings resulted in directing his attorneys to pursue criminal prosecutions for any individual caught crossing illegally, sparked a national uproar. The President was forced to issue a new Executive Order on June 20, which continues to produce confusion, uncertainty, and widespread criticism, never mind abhorrent conditions for those affected. The fate of some 2,300 children separated from their parents after crossing the southern border remains uncertain and bogged down in tremendous bureaucratic red tape, and 17 states have now sued the government over its family separation policy. Simply stated, the situation is a mess.   The Attorney General has also issued two precedential […]

Read More

Due process is an essential tenant of the rule of law. In the immigration context, there are certain standards that must be met to ensure a full and fair hearing for the immigrant. The immigration laws require that “Notices to Appear” (NTAs), which are essentially the immigration version of a charging document, must contain specific things. These include: nature of proceedings, legal authority for proceedings, the charges against the immigrant, the time and place of the hearing, and a notice that the alien may be represented and that they must provide the court with their contact information. On June 21st, the Supreme Court ruled in Pereira v. Sessions that failing to meet the requirement to list the time and place of the hearing when serving an NTA invalidates it. The case has potentially far-reaching implications for removal cases.   Routinely, both Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) […]

Read More

Van Der Hout LLP Immigration News Update is our e-newsletter, mailed out approximately six times a year, with recent immigration-related news and information. You can subscribe to the newsletter or view past issues below.