Badmus

From the American Immigration Council

Washington D.C. – During its nine-year history, issues have arisen with respect to restrictions on counsel by the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration agencies. Tuesday, in response to calls from the American Immigration Council and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued immediate, comprehensive changes to their policies to ensure an appropriate role for attorneys in the immigration process.

Many noncitizens are forced to navigate the immigration process without representation because they cannot afford an attorney.  But even persons who can afford one, or are represented by a pro bono attorney, have at times faced severe restrictions on their representation.  This is particularly troublesome given the significant power USCIS officers wield.  For example, they decide whether a noncitizen is entitled to stay in the U.S. or not.  The assistance of an attorney well versed in the complexities of immigration law can help safeguard the rights of these noncitizens and ensure just outcomes.   

By revising its guidance, USCIS has responded to some of the most serious access concerns.  For example, the new guidance provides that an attorney generally may sit next to his or her client during an interview, may be permitted to submit relevant documents to the USCIS officer, and may raise objections to inappropriate lines of questioning. 

The American Immigration Council looks forward to commenting on the new guidance and working with the agency to make sure it is followed.  The other immigration agencies – Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement – should take note of USCIS’s commitment to improving access to counsel and take similar steps to recognize the meaningful role that attorneys play in protecting noncitizens’ rights.

To view the guidance see: 

• The Role of Private Attorneys and Other Representatives; Revisions to Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM) Chapters 12 and 15; AFM Update AD11-42

Categories: Blogroll,Employment Immigration,Family Immigration,General,Immigration Litigation and Removal,Legislation and Policy |

Learn more about the proposed change for certain immigrants married to US citizen and read my comments in this article posted on news talk radio station WBAP in Dallas, Texas:

Proposed Changes to Unlawful Presence Waiver Rules

Categories: Blogroll,Family Immigration,General,Legislation and Policy |

As Congress continues its budgetary deadlock, the possibility of a government shutdown looms larger by the minute. If Congress is unable to reach accord on Friday, the government will close at midnight, Saturday April 9.

In general, if the government shuts for budgetary reasons, all but “essential” government are furloughed and not allowed to work. So what does this mean for immigration agencies?

USCIS: A couple of shutdown threats back, a USCIS official stated at a stakeholder engagement that USCIS (other than the human touches on E-Verify) would not need to shut down, since all of the agency, other than E-Verify, is funded by fees. However, it is not clear that this is the case, and at least one local office has indicated that it is working on its shutdown plan. We will update as we get more information.

DOS: If there is a shutdown, the result for DOS will likely be the same as it was in the 1996 government closing. Then, the only visa issuance being done was for some diplomats and for “life or death” situations. As DOS is wont to say “a really, really important business meeting is not life or death.”

CBP: Inspection and law enforcement are considered “essential personnel,” though staffing may be more limited than usual. The borders will be open, and CBP is unsure of how the shutdown will affect the processing of applications filed at the border.

EOIR: EOIR has been advised to “put its shutdown plans in place.” As with other agencies, personnel who are not considered “essential” will be furloughed. EOIR has indicated that the detained docket would likely be considered an essential function and would therefore be able to continue in operation.

DOL: DOL is making plans for a possible shutdown. If there is a shutdown, DOL personnel will not be available to respond to e-mail or other inquiries. We do not know at this point whether iCERT/PERM would continue to function. However, because the systems require funding to run, practitioners should assume that they would not be available.

Cite as “AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11040730 (posted Apr. 7, 2011)”

Categories: Blogroll,Employer Compliance,Employment Immigration,Family Immigration,General,Immigration Litigation and Removal |

View this short video from the American Immigration Lawyers Association for real solutions to the immigration problem:

http://multivu.prnewswire.com/player/41787-comprehensive-immigration-reform/

Categories: Blogroll,Employer Compliance,Employment Immigration,Family Immigration,General,Immigration Litigation and Removal,Legislation and Policy,Medical Professionals |

From the Immigration Policy Center

Washington D.C. – Earlier this week, the American Immigration Council’s Legal Action Center (LAC), the American Immigration Lawyers Association, and the Pennsylvania Immigration Resource Center filed an amicus brief with the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) urging the government to protect the rights of immigrants whose mental disabilities prevent them from participating meaningfully in their own removal hearings. Nearly one in six individuals in immigration custody have some form of mental illness, and there have been reports of mistaken deportations of U.S. citizens with mental disabilities. “This is particularly disturbing given that these immigrants are not granted court-appointed counsel in immigration proceedings” said Melissa Crow, Director of the Legal Action Center.

The BIA is currently considering a case involving a noncitizen with mental disabilities and sought input from the LAC on a range of questions relating to procedures for adjudicating this and similar cases. The LAC urged that a single case, which does not raise fully all the issues that need to be resolved, is not the proper forum for deciding such complicated issues with far-reaching implications. Instead, the LAC argued that a rulemaking process, with outreach to a broad spectrum of stakeholders, including disability rights advocates, mental health professionals and social service providers, would be a more appropriate way to proceed.

While the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly addressed the rights of defendants with mental disabilities during criminal trials, no comparable guidance exists for immigrants with mental disabilities during removal proceedings. The Immigration and Nationality Act charges the Attorney General with prescribing safeguards in removal proceedings to protect the rights and privileges of certain immigrants with mental disabilities. At a minimum, such safeguards must include counsel. Additional safeguards, including the appointment of a guardian, friend or relative, may also be required for immigrants whose disabilities are so severe that they cannot communicate with their attorneys. If the requisite safeguards are unavailable, termination of proceedings is appropriate. The Board also received amicus briefs from the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition, Human Rights Watch, Physicians for Human Rights, as well as Texas Appleseed and Advocacy, Inc.

Categories: Blogroll,Family Immigration,Immigration Litigation and Removal,Legislation and Policy |

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently announced that it has redesigned the Permanent Resident Card—commonly known as the “Green Card”—to incorporate severalmajor new security features. The Green Card redesign is the latest advance in USCIS’s ongoing efforts to deter immigration fraud. State-of-the-art technology incorporated into the new card prevents counterfeiting, obstructs tampering, and facilitates quick and accurate authentication. Beginning today,USCIS will issue all Green Cards in the new, more secure format.

“Redesigning the Green Card is a major achievement for USCIS,” said Director Alejandro Mayorkas. The new security technology makes a critical contribution to the integrity of the immigration system.”

The enhanced features will better serve law enforcement, employers, and immigrants, all of whom look to the Green Card as definitive proof of authorization to live and work in the United States. Among the benefits of the redesign: Secure optical media will store biometrics for rapid and reliable identification of the card holder. Holographic images, laser engraved fingerprints, and high resolution micro-images will make the card nearly impossible to reproduce. Tighter integration of the card design with personalized elements will make it difficult to alter the card if stolen. Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) capability will allow Customs and Border Protection officers at ports of entry to read the card from a distance and compare it immediately to file data. Finally, a preprinted return address will enable the easy return of a lost card to USCIS.

In keeping with the Permanent Resident Card’s nickname, it will now be colored green for easy recognition. USCIS will replace Green Cards already in circulation as individuals apply for renewal or replacement.

Categories: Blogroll,Employment Immigration,Family Immigration,General,Medical Professionals |

From the Immigration Policy Center –

March 18, 2010

Washington D.C. - Today, in the Washington Post, Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsay Graham (R-SC) laid out their blueprint for immigration reform legislation, noting that the American people want Congress to reform the badly broken immigration system. Their framework, welcomed by the President in a statement also released today, rests on four pillars: ending illegal employment through biometric Social Security cards, enhancing border and interior enforcement, managing the flow of future immigration to correspond to economic realities, and creating a tough but fair path toward legalization for the 11 million people currently in the U.S. without authorization. While there will undoubtedly be intense debate over the specifics of each component, the framework marks an important bipartisan step forward on an issue that has been mired in political controversy and held up by both parties for too long.

 ”Today’s statements mark renewed commitment to providing immigration reform that will bolster the economy and provide for America’s future,” said Mary Giovagnoli, Director of the Immigration Policy Center. ”We encourage the President and Senators Schumer and Graham to go beyond words and produce legislation that will finally fix our broken immigration system once and for all.” 
Of critical importance is the recognition that immigration reform can’t be accomplished if we focus on just one aspect of the problem. While many think that immigration reform is only about the millions of unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States, the scope and necessity of reform is much greater, and will have a significant positive impact on U.S. citizens and businesses. For example, there are insufficient numbers of visas for either high-skilled or less-skilled workers to meet the changing needs of the U.S. economy and labor market, which hurts U.S. business and fuels unauthorized immigration when economic times are good. Outdated and arbitrary visa caps have created long backlogs of family members who wait up to 20 years to be reunited with family living in the United States. Wage and workplace violations by unscrupulous employers who exploit immigrant workers are undercutting honest businesses and harming all U.S. workers. Inadequate government infrastructure is delaying the integration of immigrants who want to become U.S. citizens and fully participate in our civic life.  

The Immigration Policy Center has developed a series of papers which clearly lay out the problems with our broken immigration system, and the solutions which must be included in comprehensive immigration reform legislation. 
To read the papers in the series see:  

• Breaking Down the Problems: What’s Wrong With our Current Immigration System
• Family Immigration: Repairing our Broken Immigration System
• Enforcing Immigration Laws: Repairing our Broken Immigration System
• Naturalization and Integration: Repairing our Broken Immigration System
• Earned Legalization: Repairing our Broken Immigration System
• Employment Verification: Repairing our Broken Immigration System

Categories: Employer Compliance,Employment Immigration,Family Immigration,General,Legislation and Policy |

 The claim that illegal immigrants are “cutting in line” is blathered on talk radio all of the time. But, the truth is, there is no line for most undocumented immigrants. Before throwing your hands up in frustration and defeat when you hear this myth, consider responding with these quick mythbusting facts!

FACT: There is no “line” for the vast majority of undocumented immigrants. Accusations that immigrants in the U.S. illegally — numbering an estimated 12 million, and representing five to six percent of the U.S. workforce — should simply get in line miss the point: There is no line and the “regular channels” do not include them.

FACT: Approximately 500,000 undocumented immigrants enter the U.S. each year — most coming to work and typically to do so in the service sector — yet there are only 5,000 green cards for unskilled workers. Until there are more legal avenues for employers to hire immigrant workers, illegal immigration will fill the gap and we will not gain the control over immigration that the American people demand.

More mythbusting facts on this issue can be found in Why Don’t They Just Get In Line? The Real Story of Getting a “Green Card” and Coming to the U.S. Legally, a report from the Immigration Policy Center

-American Immigration Lawyers Association

Categories: Blogroll,Employment Immigration,Family Immigration,General,Legislation and Policy |

Shortly after a devastating earthquake destroyed the homes and lives of innumerable Haitians, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano announced the designation of Temporary Protective Status (TPS) for the roughly 100,000-200,000 eligible Haiti nationals currently in the United States as of January 12, 2010. As the world continues to respond with an outpouring of relief efforts, it is important to understand the facts on what TPS is, what it isn’t, how it works and who is eligible.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) released a fact sheet which provides background information vital to understanding TPS, including:

• Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is a temporary, humanitarian form of relief from deportation that does not include granting permanent residence or “amnesty” to unauthorized immigrants in the United States.
• The 100,000-200,000 Haitian immigrants whom the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) estimates are now in the United States on a temporary basis or without authorization will not be subject to removal as long as there is no functioning country to which they can return, and provided that they do not have criminal records.
• The Secretary of Homeland Security, “in consultation with the Secretary of State, can issue TPS for periods of 6 to 18 months and can extend these periods if conditions do not change in the designated country.”
• Major requirements for TPS include compliance with nationality and physical presence criteria (such as evidence of a passport issued by the designated country), continuous physical presence in the United States since the date TPS went into effect, timely registration, and being otherwise admissible as an immigrant.

To view the fact sheet in its entirety, see:

• Granting Refuge: Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitians in the United States

Categories: Blogroll,Family Immigration,General,Immigration Litigation and Removal,Legislation and Policy |

On June 26, 2009, the ACLU of Texas made the following, highly-anticipated announcement regarding the settlement of a pending case in Brownsville, Texas, involving Mexican Americans who were categorically denied U.S. passports simply due to the fact that they were born by midwife:

State Department Agrees To Fair Issuance Of Passports To Mexican Americans (6/26/2009)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

McALLEN, TX –The U.S. Department of State (DOS) has agreed to implement new procedures designed to ensure the fair and prompt review of U.S. passport applications by Mexican Americans whose births in Texas were attended by midwives. Under the agreement, no eligible applicant should be denied a passport.

The procedural changes are the result of a settlement agreement following a class action lawsuit filed by a coalition of civil rights and legal organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Texas, the international law firm Hogan & Hartson LLP, and Refugio del Rio Grande, Inc.

“The new procedures agreed to by the government are aimed at restoring the core American values of fairness and equality to the ways in which it issues U.S. passports,” said Vanita Gupta, staff attorney with the ACLU Racial Justice Program who worked on the case along with the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project. “Citizens will no longer be denied a passport solely because of their race, ancestry or because they happened to be born at home with a midwife.”

The settlement comes at a particularly crucial time. The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), which went into effect June 1, requires every American who wishes to exit or enter or the United States to have a valid U.S. passport or passport card. Previously, citizens needed only a valid U.S. driver’s license to travel between the U.S. and Mexico or Canada.

“For U.S. citizens who live in the Southwest, a passport is now as necessary as a driver’s license,” said Lisa Graybill, Legal Director for the ACLU of Texas. “We are relieved that US citizens who work, shop, receive medical care, and have family on both sides of the border will no longer be in danger of losing their jobs, risking their health, or being separated from family members simply because of the circumstances of their birth.”  

Although midwifery has been a common practice for more than a century – particularly in rural and other traditionally underserved communities – the lawsuit charged that DOS was violating the due process and equal protection rights of virtually all midwife-delivered U.S. citizens living in the southern border region by forcing them to provide an excessive number of documents normally not required to prove their citizenship. Then, even after the applicants supplied further proof of their citizenship, DOS responded by summarily closing their applications without explanation.

“Because DOS lacked clear standards, countless passport applicants were treated arbitrarily, said Lisa Brodyaga, the attorney for Refugio del Rio Grande. ”With this settlement, applicants born with midwives are guaranteed the same full and fair consideration of their applications as everyone else.  This is especially critical now given that the June 1st deadline of WHTI has passed.”

The lawsuit also charged that the Department’s practices were violating the Administrative Procedure Act, which was enacted as a safeguard against arbitrary and capricious government agency procedures. During the course of the litigation, several of the plaintiffs were granted passports even though they had been denied previously on the very same showing of evidence of citizenship. 

Pending court approval, DOS will train its staff on how to fairly weigh all the evidence provided in passport applications and how to avoid improperly subjecting people whose births were assisted by midwives in Texas and along the U.S.-Mexico border to heightened scrutiny in reviewing their passport applications. All denials will be automatically reviewed by a three-member panel comprised of experienced DOS staff members, and if that panel also denies an application, DOS must communicate the specific reasons for the denial to the applicant. The applicant can then challenge the denial and ask DOS to reconsider its decision.

Additionally, anyone birthed by a midwife who has filed an application for a passport between April 2003 and September 15, 2008 and, with a few exceptions, whose application was not expressly “denied,” can re-apply for free. DOS will be setting up mobile units across the border on specific dates to assist those reapplying.

DOS has also agreed to restrictions on a list it maintains of suspect midwives and other birth attendants, which it purported to use to justify its discriminatory policies. Importantly, DOS will not deny a passport application simply because the applicant’s birth attendant or midwife is on the list. Furthermore, DOS will conduct regular reviews of the list to ensure that no one is included unless DOS has a reasonable, lawful basis to do so. These measures will help ensure that DOS does force passport applicants to take unnecessary measures to prove their citizenship and does not arbitrarily deny passports merely because the individual was born to a suspect midwife. 

“We’re very happy that we were able to come to an agreement with the government that recognizes every U.S. citizen’s constitutional right to be treated with fairness and equality,” said Adam K. Levin of Hogan & Hartson. “You can’t deny basic rights to an entire group of U.S. citizens because their parents did not deliver them in hospitals.”

…. 

To read the announcement and find links to the complaint and settlement, click here.

By Michelle Richart

Categories: Blogroll,Family Immigration,General,Immigration Litigation and Removal,Legislation and Policy |