Senate Democrats – Page 3 – immigrationcourtside.com

☠️⚰️ “I WANT TO DIE,” SAYS 7-YEAR OLD VICTIM OF AMERICA’S FAILURE TO HONOR ASYLUM LAWS! — “Biden’s Wall” Of Bad Tech & Bad Bureaucracy Cheaper, More Effective At Inflicting “Cruelty For Cruelty’s Sake” Than “Trump’s Folly!”🤮

Biden Statue of Liberty — Biden Betrays Promises to Refugees
Steve Sack @ Star Tribune
Republished under license

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/03/11/asylum-seekers-mexico-border-app/

Arelis R. Hernandez reports for WashPost:

MATAMOROS, Mexico — It was supposed to be his last day in Mexico. The 7-year-old Venezuelan boy beamed as he bade farewell to his teacher, Liliana Carlos, at a school for migrant children living in tents while waiting for their chance to enter the United States.

His family, finally, had obtained an appointment in February with U.S. Customs and Border Protection after weeks of trying to use a new app to secure a slot.

Now they hoped to be allowed to begin a new life in America. No more sleeping on the ground. No more threats of kidnapping. No more watching his mother cry.

But instead of the safety his family longed for inside the United States, the boy returned to the Sidewalk School, inconsolable, his teacher recalled. CBP officials on the border bridge sent back about 50 families, including his. They’d all made appointments online as family units. But agents were now enforcing a rule requiring each child to register individually.

“We are never going to leave,” Carlos recounted the boy telling her as she ushered the wailing child into an alcove known as the “calm corner.”

. . . .

Two weeks after the boy was sent back to the Sidewalk School, Carlos said her once hopeful student still doesn’t have a new appointment. The child’s name is being withheld by The Washington Post out of concerns for his safety.

She tried to console him, she recalled, but he was despondent, telling her: “I want to die.”

. . . .

Within a northern Mexico safe house, a 30-something-year-old asylum seeker ran his fingers across the bumpy scar tissue that had healed unevenly around his wrists. The marks are remnants of the torture he endured two weeks earlier.

His voice quivered as he recalled black-clad kidnappers ambushing the house where he was living at 1 a.m. in late January. They bound his hands and feet with electric cables and threw him in the trunk of a vehicle.

For two days, he was repeatedly burned and beaten.

The Washington Post is withholding the man’s name and other identifying characteristics for safety reasons because he is still in Mexico. But the man showed a reporter the lacerations and described how men pistol-whipped and beat him. Dark circular scars mark the spots on his legs where his captors pressed lit cigarettes into his flesh.

“The app doesn’t feel fair,” said the man, who was denied an exemption to the Title 42 rule barring most migrants from entering and has failed to secure an appointment. “I need protection in the United States.”

. . . .

Nearby in Reynosa, a three-acre lot covered in human feces near a sandy river peninsula overrun by Mexican cartel members sits adjacent to a camp for migrants.

They sleep and eat 50 feet away from the open pit. Soiled toilet paper clings to cactus needles. A toxic plume of nostril-singeing smoke rises over the encampment from a trash heap at the river’s edge where plastic burns.

Nearby, a collection of tall glass candles bearing the image of La Santa Muerte, a Grim Reaper-like Mexican folk saint worshiped by narcos, have been placed in a circle drawn into the sand.

This is Camp Rio, where at least 1,000 Haitian asylum seekers are spending each day they can’t get an appointment.

Many Black migrants are pushed to the fringes of border cities to wait in subhuman conditions. They have more difficulty accessing shelters than those with lighter skin and often experience racism in Mexico.

. . .

The crowd of people around the attorneys swelled. Parents with upcoming dates wondered what would happen if they sent their small children across the bridge alone as unaccompanied minors. D’Cruz begged them not to.

“If we don’t, we will lose everything we’ve worked for,” a woman from Nicaragua said, pressing her bewildered daughter against her leg.

Advocates counted between 40 and 50 children surrendered at the bridge alone days later.

Back at the Sidewalk School, the number of children enrolled has swelled. Carlos, the coordinator, said they went from teaching a handful of kids each day to more three dozen in recent weeks. She said that means more and more children, and their families, aren’t getting appointments.

The longer they despair in Mexico, parents say, the more they consider sending their children to the United States alone.

Valentina Sanchez, 24, of Venezuela, and her husband had appointments in February. Their 3-year-old son did not. He crossed and she stayed behind with the toddler.

******************

Read the complete article at the link.

Folks, tragically, we’ve seen in the last few days how totally unsafe Mexico is even for U.S. citizens! Yet, the Biden Administration thinks it’s “A-OK” to propose illegally repelling tens of thousands of non-Mexicans back to danger, torture, exploitation, and death without fairly considering their legal claims for refuge and without insuring that those making such life and death decisions are actually qualified to do so (hint, many aren’t).

At the current rate of 800 “interviews” per day, it would take the Administration four months just to process the 100,000 humans already waiting at the border (4 interviews/officer/day). If the Administration had started with a plan to hire and train 1,000 Asylum Officers over the more than 2.5 years they have been in office, the job could be done in less than a month!

The Administration can (and does) make all the false claims that “CBP One” works that it wants. As Arelis and others who actually interface with asylum seekers on the border have documented, the facts say otherwise!

I happened to be watching “Meet The Press” with Chuck Todd. House Judiciary Chair Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) said we need a “surge” of Asylum Officers to the border, grant asylum to those who qualify, remove those who don’t, use more TPS strategically, and open more pathways to legal immigration. Not “rocket science” by any measure!

Yet, although Biden has “dabbled” in some of these initiatives, he still has no systemic plan for reinstating asylum law in a fair and effective manner at the border. Sen. Menendez correctly noted that if Biden continues on the course he has charted, he will go down as the “Asylum Denier In Chief.”

Senator Menendez also said that if Biden has the poor judgement to reinstitute “family detention,” it will fail just as it did in both the Obama and Trump Administrations. He characterized having eliminated family detention upon assuming office as one of the best moves that Biden has made on immigration. Talk about “taking points off the scoreboard!”

Thanks to Arelis Hernandez and a few other reporters who refuse to let the human disaster of the Biden Administration’s treacherous abandonment of the law at the border and the values it represents go unnoticed! It doesn’t have to be this way!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

03-12-237

🏴‍☠️☠️🤮 “THE END OF ASYLUM” — IGNORING THE ADVICE OF ASYLUM EXPERTS AND PROGRESSIVE DEMS, BIDEN ADMINISTRATION SEEKS TO FINISH THE TRUMP/MILLER WHITE NATIONALIST PROGRAM TO KILL ASYLUM AT THE BORDER, WHERE IT IS MOST NECESSARY & GUARANTEED BY STATUTE — Like Trump & Miller, Biden Plans To Strangle ⚰️ Asylum By Evading & Bypassing Statute W/O Legislation — Experts Planning “War Of Resistance” To Administration They Helped Elect, But Now Turns Its Back On Humanity!

Trump Dumping Asylum Seekers in Hondras — Legal asylum seekers from Central America might have thought that cruelty, illegality, and stupidity went out with the Trump Administration. They were wrong! Now Biden proposes to lawlessly “presume denial” of asylum — with no legal basis — and dump legal asylum seekers of color from his “disfavored nations” back into Mexico, whose asylum system is dysfunctional and where abusive treatment of asylum seekers has been well documented and recognized by a Federal Court! Women suffering from gender-based persecution are particular targets of this Administration’s campaign against humanity!
Artist: Monte Wolverton
Reproduced under license

Many groups issued immediate statements of outrage and protest at this cruel, lawless, and intellectually dishonest betrayal! I set forth two of them here:

From the American Immigration Council:

PRESS RELEASE

Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security Release Details of Dangerous New Asylum Transit Ban

Enforcement Border Enforcement Asylum

February 21, 2023

Last modified:

February 21, 2023

WASHINGTON, Feb. 21, 2023—Today, the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that will implement a new asylum transit ban—one of the most restrictive border control measures to date under any president. The policy will penalize asylum seekers who cross the border irregularly or fail to apply for protection in other nations they transit through on their way to the United States.

As described in the NPRM, the proposed asylum transit ban rule would all but bar asylum for any non-Mexican who crosses the U.S.-Mexico border between ports of entry, unless they had previously applied for—and been denied—asylum in another country before arrival.

Specifically:

The rule would apply to all non-Mexican migrants (except unaccompanied minors) who had not been pre-approved under one of the Biden administration’s parole programs, which are currently open only to certain nationals of 5 countries; pre-register at a port of entry via CBP One or a similar scheduling system (or arrive at a port of entry and demonstrate they could not access the system); or get rejected for asylum in a transit country.

During an asylum seeker’s initial screening interview with an asylum officer, the officer will determine whether the new rule applies to them. If so, they will fail their credible fear screening unless they can demonstrate they were subject to an exception such as a medical emergency, severe human trafficking, or imminent danger—which would “rebut the presumption” of ineligibility.

Migrants subject to the rule, who do not meet the exceptions above, would be held to a higher standard of screening than is typically used for asylum (“reasonable fear”). If a migrant meets that standard, they will be allowed to apply for asylum before an immigration judge—although the text of the proposed regulation is unclear on whether they would actually be eligible to be granted asylum.

Migrants who do not meet the credible or reasonable fear standard can request review of the fear screening process in front of an immigration judge.

Once the regulation is formally published in the Federal Register, the public will have 30 days to comment on the proposal. The administration is legally required to consider and respond to all comments submitted during this period before publishing the final rule, which itself must precede implementing the policy. Given the Biden administration’s expectation that the new rule will be in place for the expiration of the national COVID-19 emergency on May 11, and the potential end of the Title 42 border expulsion policy at that time, the timeline raises substantial concerns that the administration will not fulfill its obligation to seriously consider all comments submitted by the public before the rule is finalized.

Furthermore, the sunset date for the new rule, two years after it becomes effective, is after the end of the current presidential term—making it impossible to guarantee it will not be extended indefinitely.

In 2020, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel blocked the Trump administration’s asylum transit ban from being applied to thousands of asylum seekers who were unlawfully prevented from accessing the U.S. asylum process. The ban was later vacated by the D.C. District Court.

The American Immigration Council was a part of the Al Otro Lado v. Wolf class action lawsuit on behalf of individual asylum seekers and the legal services organization Al Otro Lado (AOL), which challenged the legality of the previous asylum transit ban as applied to asylum seekers who had been turned back at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Jeremy Robbins
Executive Director
American Immigration Council
PHOTO: AIC websitel

The following statement is from Jeremy Robbins, Executive Director, The American Immigration Council:

“President Biden committed to restoring access to asylum while on the campaign trail, but today’s proposal is a clear embrace of Trump-style crackdowns on asylum seekers, many of whom are fleeing from globally recognized oppressive regimes. For over four decades, U.S. law has allowed any person in the United States to apply for asylum no matter how they got here. The new proposed rule would all but destroy that promise, by largely reinstating prior asylum bans that were found to be illegal.

“Not only is the new asylum transit ban illegal and immoral, if put into place as proposed, it would create unnecessary barriers to protection that will put the lives of asylum seekers at risk. While the rule purports to be temporary, the precedent it sets—for this president or future presidents—could easily become permanent.

“For generations, the United States has offered a promise that any person fleeing persecution and harm in their home countries could seek asylum, regardless of how they enter the United States. Today’s actions break from his prior promises and threaten a return to some of the most harmful asylum policies of his predecessor—possibly forever.”

###

For more information, contact:

Brianna Dimas 202-507-7557 bdimas@immcouncil.org

******************************

From the Lutheran Immigration & Refugee Services:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 21, 2022
Contact: Tim Young | tyoung@lirs.org

Washington, D.C. – In preparation for the end of Title 42 asylum restrictions, the Biden administration announced a new proposed rule severely limiting asylum eligibility for those who did not first seek protection in a country they transited through to reach the United States, or who entered without notifying a border agent. The proposed rule will be subject to a 30-day period of public comment before it can take effect.

The new rule mirrors a transit asylum ban first implemented under the Trump administration, which was ultimately struck down by federal judges in multiple courts. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provides that people seeking protection may apply for asylum regardless of manner of entry, and does not require them to have first applied for protection in another country.

Krish O’Mara Vignarajah
CEO
Lutheran Immigrantion & Refugee Service

In response to the proposed asylum eligibility rule, Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, President and CEO of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, said:

“This rule reaches into the dustbin of history to resurrect one of the most harmful and illegal anti-asylum policies of the Trump administration. This transit ban defies decades of humanitarian protections enshrined in U.S. law and international agreements, and flagrantly violates President Biden’s own campaign promises to restore asylum. Requiring persecuted people to first seek protection in countries with no functioning asylum systems themselves is a ludicrous and life-threatening proposal.

While the Biden administration has launched a smartphone app for asylum appointments and expanded a temporary parole option for an extremely limited subset of four nationalities, these measures are no substitute for the legal right to seek asylum, regardless of manner of entry. It is generally the most vulnerable asylum seekers who are least likely to be able to navigate a complex app plagued by technical issues, language barriers, and overwhelming demand. Many families face immediate danger and cannot afford to wait for months on end in their country of persecution. To penalize them for making the lifesaving decision to seek safety at our border flies in the face of core American values.

We urge the Biden administration to reverse course before this misguided rule denies protection to those most in need of it. Officials must recognize that decades of deterrence-based policies have had little to no impact in suppressing migration. Instead, they should focus on managing migration humanely through expanded parole programs, efficient refugee processing in the hemisphere, and an equitably accessible asylum system.”

**************************

Lest anyone believe the absolute BS coming from the Biden Administration that they “had no choice” and that this “wasn’t the choice they wanted,” here’s an article setting forth the many southern border solutions that the Administration ignored or was too incompetent to carry out in their dishonest, immoral pursuit of the anti-asylum “vision” of Stephen Miller and other White Nationalists.

💡💡”There’s many things Biden could do. We published a resource called “Forty-Two Border Solutions That Are Not Title 42.” We could have done 142,” says immigration expert Danilo Zak in The Border Chronicle! The Biden Administration has ignored, failed, or is prepared to shrug off most of them!🤯

Danilo Zak
Associate Director of Policy and Advocacy Church World Service
PHOTO: The Border Chronicle

Zak was interviewed by Melissa Del Bosque of The Border Chronicle:

There are many changes that the Biden administration and Congress could make to alleviate suffering at the southern border. Immigration policy expert Danilo Zak recently published a report that offers several solutions, from rebuilding the refugee resettlement program to expanding nonimmigrant work visas to more countries in the Western Hemisphere.

Zak, formerly of the National Immigration Forum, is Associate Director of Policy and Advocacy for the nonprofit Church World Service. He spoke with The Border Chronicle about the increase of forcibly displaced people in the Western Hemisphere and the current situation at the border. “For many, there is no line to get into—no ‘right way’ to come to the U.S.,” Zak says.

Melissa Del Bosque
Border Reporter
PHOTO: Melissadelbosque.com

Read the full interview here:

https://open.substack.com/pub/theborderchronicle/p/how-to-alleviate-suffering-at-the?r=330z7&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post

*****************

Notably, better, more robust, use of Refugee Programs established by the Refugee Act of 1980 is among Zak’s “top three.” This is something that I have been “touting” since Biden was elected, but where the Administration has failed to meet the challenge.

And, contrary to what the Administration and others might say, there is nothing unachievable about using refugee programs to deal with emergency humanitarian situations. Also, with respect to cases taking forever to process, no need for that nonsense. It’s a matter of poor bureaucratic execution rather than a defect in the legal authority.

The Refugee Act of 1980 (“RA 80”) is basically a modified version of the “emergency parole, resettle with NGOs, and petition Congress to adjust status” that was used on an ad hoc basis to resettle Indochinese refugees and others on an emergency basis prior to the RA 80. Except, that the criteria, resettlement mechanisms, and adjustment process were all “built in” to the statute. Consequently, although Congress was to be consulted in advance, that process was designed to run smoothly, efficiently, and on an emergency basis if necessary.

While “Congress bashing” is now a favorite pastime of the Executive, Judiciary, and media, in 1980 Congress actually provided a mechanism to regularize the processing of type of refugee flows now facing the U.S. The statutory flexibility and the legal tools to deal with these situations are in RA 80.

A subsequent Congress even added the “expedited removal” and “credible fear” process so that initial asylum screening could be conducted by expert Asylum Officers at or near the border and those “screened out” would be subject to expedited removal without full hearings in Immigration Court. Clearly, there was never a need for the Title 42 nonsense for any competent Administration.

Basically, if an Administration can run a large-scale parole program, which the Biden Administration did for Afghanistan and is doing now for Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Haiti, it can run a legal refugee program beyond our borders, even in a “country in crisis” if necessary.

The idea that a statutory scheme specifically designed to have the flexibility deal with future mass refugee situations couldn’t be used to deal with the current humanitarian situation in the Western Hemisphere is pure poppycock!

Also unadulterated BS: The Biden Administration’s proposal to make the “end of asylum” at the southern border “temporary,” for two years! In 2025, the Biden Administration might not even be in office. If there is a GOP Administration, you can be sure that the demise of asylum at the border will become permanent, with or without legislation.

Also, what would be an Administration’s rationale for resuming asylum processing at the southern border in two years. Surely, there will be some other “bogus border crisis” cooked up to extend the bars. And, if there is no such crisis, the claim will be that the bars are “working as intended” so what’s the rationale for terminating them.

The argument that complying with the law by fairly processing asylum seekers regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, or manner of arrival, as the law requires, might actually encourage people to apply for protection will always be there — hanging over cowardly politicos afraid of the consequences of granting protection. Fact is, the current Administration has so little belief in our legal system and their own ability to operate within in, and so little concern for the human lives involved, that they are scared to death of failure. That’s not likely to change in two years — or ever!

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-22-23

⚖️🗽 “TEA’S COFFEE” ☕️ WITH TEA IVANOVIC, CO-FOUNDER & COO OF IMMIGRANT FOOD: “2022 was a cluster——- year for immigration!” 2023 isn’t likely to be better! — Watch Tea’s compact video review of 2022 and her interview with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) about what might (or might not) “go down” in the field of immigration for 2023!

Hello friends,
As we move deeper into 2023, you may be, like we are, still
processing 2022 (or 2019, let’s be honest). For immigration, the
new year comes with its own challenges as a divided Congress
makes policy decisions difficult and a shift to the 2024 presidential
race takes hold. Nevertheless, we have to remain hopeful that
progress can still be made. And you can be part of that! To remind
yourself of what happened last year and learn what issues our
government can focus on, check out our special edition of Téa’s
Coffee where she goes to the Senate to meet New York Senator
Kirsten Gillibrand.
We hope you enjoy this issue as much as we do,
-The Immigrant Food Team
Check out the full issue

https://immigrantfood.com/the-think-table/

*************************

Several “quick takes” from Tea’s interview with Senator Gillibrand:

She has introduced an “Article I Immigration Court Bill” in the Senate and believes it’s the type of bipartisan initiative that might interest enough GOP legislators to form a “working bipartisan majority.” A similar bill introduced by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) in the last House received a hearing and was favorably voted out of Committee, but was never taken up by the full House, see, e.g., https://lofgren.house.gov/media/press-releases/house-judiciary-committee-passes-lofgren-s-legislation-reform-us-immigration;
Sen. Gillibrand’s biggest fear for American democracy is “demonization and racism” of which immigrants and asylum seekers are prime targets;
She thinks the “biggest danger” comes from “White supremacist groups” — basically right-wing domestic terrorists.

Both Tea’s 2022 summary and the interview with Sen. Gillibrnd are well worth the watch and can be accessed at links above.

“Social Justice/Business/Courageous Leadership Dynamo”🌪 Tea Ivanovic was recently recognized as one of “Forbes 30 Under 30” by Forbes Magazine and a “Woman Who Means Business” by Washington Business Journal! She is an “NDPA New Generation Super-Star” 🌟 to watch, for sure! And, from a “DMV standpoint,” Tea is a proud Virginia Tech Hokie alum and a former varsity tennis player. Certainly, a person of unlimited talents who has chosen to use them for the public good! You can check out my previous “Courtside profile” of Tea here: https://immigrationcourtside.com/2022/09/10/🇺🇸🗽👍🏼-immigrant-nation-teas-truth-wisdom-americans-views-on-immigrants-and-immigration-are-overwhelmingly-positive/

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-17-22

🇺🇸⚖️🗽 ATTN NDPA WARRIORS! — BE ON THE “CUTTING EDGE” OF THE FIGHT FOR JUSTICE IN AMERICA AT THE “RETAIL LEVEL!” — Apply now to be part of Immigrant Defenders Law Center’s first cohort in the Spanish Immersion Project for Lawyers! Learn Spanish on the job while representing unaccompanied minors. This is an opportunity you don’t want to miss!

Lindsay Toczylowski

• 1st

Executive Director at Immigrant Defenders Law Center

13h • Edited •

13 hours ago

This is an idea that Yliana Johansen-Méndez and I have been talking about for a long time and I am so excited to see it come to fruition at Immigrant Defenders Law Center. We need more Spanish speaking attorneys ready to fight for our communities, and there simply are not enough to fill the need that exists currently. So, let’s change that.

That was the simple idea behind the ImmDef Spanish Immersion Project for Lawyers. Give people an opportunity to become the lawyers we need. Please share widely and encourage those interested to apply quickly – we anticipate this inaugural class will fill quickly! #jobposting #immigrationlaw #socialjustice #SpanishForLawyers

Here’s the link for more information about this innovative program:

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7031861959402668032/?lipi=urn:li:page:d_flagship3_company;w6mFNs7tSTyeX2lkBEvAJA==

********************************************

Compare this creativity and action with the moribund bureaucracies and weak, unimaginative, timid leadership at DHS, EOIR, and DOJ. The wrong folks are running the immigration bureaucracy, and doing a really lousy job of it!

This Administration might “nominally claim” to recognize the importance of representation for asylum seekers and other immigrants and to encourage it; but, their actions tell a much different story.

The dysfunctional chaos at EOIR, culture of denial, “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” on steroids, poor personnel and staffing choices, failure to establish a constructive dialogue with NGOs and the pro bono bar, and the simply jaw-dropping, avoidable “extreme user unfriendliness of almost everything at EOIR” has been a huge “turn off” for those who might be considering taking on pro bono, or even low bono, cases. If anything, some practitioners have told me that they are cutting back on their Immigration Court work because it has become so stressful, all encompassing, and discouraging.

EOIR should NOT be operating in this insane manner in a Dem Administration! But, unhappy fact is that it is!

Here’s a chance to be on the front lines of the fight for democracy and social justice in America! Check out Immigrant Defenders Law Center!

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-16-23

☠️🤯👎🏼 LINDSAY TCZYLOWSKI @ IMMIGRANT DEFENDERS LAW CENTER WITH AN INTIMATE, DISCOURAGING, LOOK INSIDE MERRICK GARLAND’S UNFAIR “COURTS OF INJUSTICE” 🤮 @ EOIR — Where DHS Prosecutors Can Basically “Take The Day Off” & Undeservedly “Win” Life Or Death Cases Before “Judges” They “Own,” While Garland, Biden Administration, & Senate Dems “Look The Other Way!”

Lindsay Toczylowski writes on Linkedin:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/lindsay-toczylowski-2a1a833_i-always-tell-the-new-immigration-attorneys-activity-7030040114038804480-KF4L?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios

Lindsay Toczylowski

• 1st

Executive Director at Immigrant Defenders Law Center

9h •

9 hours ago

I always tell the new immigration attorneys at Immigrant Defenders Law Center to never forget just how stacked against our clients the odds are in immigration court. Today was a classic example.

Went in with a case that we have spent weeks on end prepping for, seeking asylum protection for our client. We extensively argued our case. Govt attorney waived arguments & had no filings for today, last filing they made in case was in 2020. Yet the judge found that despite a finding of past persecution the govt had rebutted the presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution.

So the govt atty who didn’t make an argument, who didn’t file anything was found to have successfully rebutted our claims. We plan to appeal, but the imbalance of power in an immigration courtroom, even when someone has an attorney, is profound. Without an attorney it is inhumane.

At the end of the hearing the judge excused the ICE attorney so he did not have to stay through the oral decision. So we sat there, with our client wiping tears from his eyes, and received the decision. We took notes on its mistakes. We reserved the right to appeal.

And I felt this pit in my stomach knowing that my client was seeing his life flash before his eyes, knowing this put him in grave danger. And yet the ICE atty, one of the principal ppl responsible for putting him at risk, couldn’t even bother to stay to the end of the hearing.

Picture of the mural that sits across from one of the immigration courts in DTLA, which seems so fitting on today and so many days.

Mural

Grateful to my colleague Alvaro M. Huerta who was an incredible advocate for our client today.

************************

A very sad commentary on the “culture of denial” still prevalent at EOIR and Garland’s failure to address it head on. Seems like the ACC knew how the judge would rule in advance.

I actually remember a long-ago time at the USDOJ when a “win” was “when justice was done” not just “another denial and deportation notched.” As a few “old timers” might remember, I actually incorporated it into my “welcoming speech” to new INS trial counsel when I was the Deputy General Counsel/sometimes Acting GC at the “Legacy INS.” In a GOP Administration, no less!

Times have changed, I guess, to where a Dem Administration and a Dem AG function “below the Reagan line!” Interesting, yet depressing!

The IJ “excusing” the ACC from the oral decision — at least a violation of judicial etiquette, disrespectful, and unprofessional, if not marginally unethical — shows just where things stand in a system run by a former Federal Judge who has forgotten what justice and public service are all about — at least when it comes to those stuck in his dysfunctional and unprofessional “courts!”

I always insisted that both counsel be present for the delivery of an oral decision. If that were impossible, because of time constraints or a legitimate personal emergency, then the obvious solution was to either 1) issue a written decision, or 2) invite the parties to return another day to listen to the oral decision. A third option was to record it “in chambers,” and have a JLC or intern transcribe and edit it for issuance as a written decision. I actually noticed when the INS ACC was working on the files for the next case or “secretly” looking at an i-phone under counsel table while I was dictating the oral decision. While I didn’t mention it, it did “inform” my opinion of them as attorneys.

Unfortunately, I wouldn’t count on Garland’s Trump holdover BIA to correct the egregious injustices on the merits of this case. The appeals system is also “programmed to deny and deport” — just as Sessions and Barr constructed it!

One might have thought that a Dem Administration and a former Federal Judge would be interested in bringing due process, fundamental fairness, and decisional excellence to one of the most important Federal “Court” Systems — one they totally control! Not so! This is most disappointing and enraging, particularly for those practicing in the “skewed against the individual” mess that Garland tolerates and enables!

This week, I posted the “best of EOIR,” fair, talented, expert Judges like Denver’s Judge Brea Burgie. https://immigrationcourtside.com/2023/02/06/-modeling-eoirs-potential-in-denver-judge-brea-c-burgie-attorne/.

I also recently featured a number of egregious examples of the worst of the Garland/Biden/Dems’ inexcusable, continuing dystopian chaos at EOIR: a decade of “outlaw” decision making, wrong legal standards, and contempt for court orders, https://immigrationcourtside.com/2023/02/10/-american-outlaws-the-continuing-saga-of-eoirs-flawed-decade-long-quest-to-deny-protection-to-honduran-woman-latest-chapter-bia-rebuked-by-1/; EOIR judges, at both levels, who don’t understand the legal concept of “torture” but are allowed by Garland to keep incorrectly adjudicating CAT cases, https://immigrationcourtside.com/2023/02/07/-how-can-judges-who-dont-know-what-torture-is-fairly-predict-its-future-probability-they-cant-1st-cir-outs/; violations of stipulated court orders on televideo hearings by EOIR in New Jersey, https://immigrationcourtside.com/2023/02/04/scofflaw-doj-eoir-violates-stipulated-court-order-on-video-hearings-garlands-failed-court-system-moves-a-step-closer-to-contempt-as-federal/; the outrageous “Montana mess;” https://immigrationcourtside.com/2023/02/08/😟montana-is-flyover-country-for-eoir-bureaucrats-due-process-public-service-for-people-below-out-of-sight-out-of-mind-1000-mile-drives-required-in-person/; “egregious ethnocentric judging” at EOIR “outed” by the Third Circuit, https://immigrationcourtside.com/2023/01/27/🤮☠%EF%B8%8F-egregious-ethnocentric-judging-bia-ignores-record-in-fabricated-denial-of-guatemalan-claim-3rd-cir-puzzled-by-bias/; a history of “secret decisions” and shocking inconsistencies in BIA decisions on “life or death” issues, https://immigrationcourtside.com/2023/01/28/-little-shop-of-horrors-heretofore-hidden-in-the-bowels-of-eoir-a-trove-of-secret-decisions-unfair-advantages-for-dhs-s/.

And, folks, these examples, including the outrageous miscarriage of justice and impartial judging described by Lindsay above, just cover a period since January 27, 2023, a mere 16 days ago — basically just the “tip of Garland’s deadly iceberg of injustice at EOIR!”

Tip of the Iceberg — While numerous examples of unfairness and unprofessionalism at Garland’s dystopian EOIR have surfaced, they are “just the tip of the iceberg” masking the huge disaster lurking below where Garland and his lieutenants fear to go!
Created by Uwe Kils (iceberg) and User:Wiska Bodo (sky).
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

The unprofessional, disgraceful performance of EOIR described above, and the inexcusable failure to “clean house,” bring in qualified expert judges and professional judicial administrators, and support and institutionalize competent expert judging at EOIR, as represented by Judge Burgie and some others, would be disgraceful in ANY Administration! Coming during a Democratic Administration that RAN ON A PLATFORM of ending xenophobic, extralegal, nativist-motivated abuses directed at asylum seekers (often of color), immigrants, and their courageous, dedicated attorneys is totally unacceptable!

Yet, Senate Dems have failed to haul Garland and his lieutenants before the Senate Judiciary Committee to be confronted by those abused on their watch and to answer for their abject failure to bring due process, fundamental fairness, best practices, and competent, expert judicial decision making to EOIR’s dystopian, dysfunctional, and outrageously unfair “faux courts!”

As Lindsay says, “I always tell the new immigration attorneys at Immigrant Defenders Law Center to never forget just how stacked against our clients the odds are in immigration court.” It does NOT have to be this way!

These are NOT life-tenured Article III judges! They are, as the DOJ is constantly reminding them, “DOJ attorneys.” GOP Administrations have demonstrated time and again the recognition that they have the power to “purge” judges who stand up for immigrants’ rights and due process and to “stack” the Immigration Courts against asylum seekers and immigrants.

Garland has the power to do the opposite: “unstack” EOIR, bring in qualified judges and administrators who are recognized, respected experts in immigration law, human rights, and due process, and create a “model Federal Judiciary” and a source for future experienced, well-qualified Article III appointments.

In nearly two years of inept and dilatory “administration” of EOIR, Garland has failed to achieve, or indeed even attempt, these essential, long-overdue reforms. Indeed, so poorly has he performed on immigration, human rights, equal justice, and racial equity, that many dedicated immigration practitioners tell me that things are markedly worse now for due process and fair judging at EOIR than at the end of the Trump Administration. See, e.g., https://immigrationcourtside.com/2022/09/21/-outrage-boils-over-at-merrick-garlands-milleresque-war-on-due-process-at-eoir-his-grotesque-mismanagement-of-immigration-courts-garland-might/, (Quoting Jason “The Asylumist” Dzubow: “But as it turns out, President Biden’s EOIR is far worse than President Trump’s. Indeed, the current level of callousness would make even Stephen Miller blush.”)

As Jason Dzubow would say, “It didn’t have to be this way!” But, sadly, and outrageously, it IS this way! Eventually, that’s something that the Democratic Party will have to answer for! Unfortunately, some of their “victims” are likely to be in their graves by then!☠️⚰️🤮

President Biden often correctly says that our democracy is in peril! Yet, one of the main places where it is most imperiled and disrespected is in HIS OWN Immigration Courts at EOIR. Why hasn’t the President led the “defense of democracy” by cleaning up the mess in his own house? Inexplicable!

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-11-22

🗽 MAINE DELEGATION RENEWS BIPARTISAN PUSH FOR EARLIER EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION FOR ASYLUM SEEKERS! — Effort Has Little Traction In Congress!

https://www.pressherald.com/2023/02/03/maine-lawmakers-continue-push-for-faster-work-permits-for-asylum-seekers/

Randy Billings reports for Portland Press Herald:

Federal and state lawmakers are renewing efforts to shorten the amount of time asylum seekers must wait before they can work and become self-sufficient.

Local officials in communities such as Portland, a destination for waves of people seeking asylum, have called on federal officials for years to reduce the waiting period for work permits, which is a minimum of six months and often much longer. They argue speeding up the process is a way to address workforce shortages as well as reduce the costs of providing financial assistance to asylum seekers who aren’t allowed to support themselves.

But every effort dating to at least to 2015, when Sen. Angus King of Maine submitted a bill to shorten the wait period to 30 days, has failed to gain traction in Congress because the appeals have been caught up in partisan and regional conflicts over immigration reform and border security.

Republican Sen. Susan Collins and Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-1st District, have proposed similar bills in recent years. And both are doing so again this session, while King, an independent, is signing on as a co-sponsor.

. . . .

Despite national polarization over the issue, calls for allowing asylum seekers to work and become self-sufficient are widely supported in Maine by Republicans, Democrats and independents. The fact that Maine has more jobs available than there are workers to fill them is a key reason for the broad support.

Even former Gov. Paul LePage, who opposed efforts to help asylum seekers during his eight years in office, revised his position during the gubernatorial campaign last fall, saying at a debate in Portland that “if asylum seekers are here, and (President) Joe Biden is not going to enforce federal law on immigration … I want to put them to work.”

Collins started pushing for the reform in 2019 and announced on Friday that she introduced a bill with Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, an Arizona independent and former Democrat, that would reduce the waiting period from six months to 30 days for asylum seekers who have gone through preliminary screening. And Pingree plans to reintroduce her bill in the House in the coming weeks.

. . . .

******************

Read the full article at the link.

Gosh, when even former GOP right-wing Gov. Paul LePage is on board, seems like it should be a “no-brainer” for Congress. But, that isn’t the way things work (or don’t) on the Hill these days.

As to requesting a “waiver” of the current 180 day statutory “lock out” provision, there currently doesn’t appear to be any process for that. The statute does state that: “An applicant for asylum is not entitled to employment authorization, but such authorization may be provided under regulation by the Attorney General.”

Therefore, it appears that the Biden Administration could establish a waiver process by regulation if it chose to. I’m not aware of any plans by the Administration to propose such a regulation.

The Administration has addressed immediate work authorization in their recently announced parole program for certain nationals of Venezuela, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Cuba. Individuals approved for this program abroad will be “paroled” into the U.S. for two years with work authorization.

The relief for states like Maine under this parole program is limited, because 1) only nationals of the four specified countries can apply; 2) the program applies prospectively only; 3) it’s uncertain what will happen to parolees after two years (one can imagine that any future GOP Administration would terminate the program, given that GOP politicos are now suing to halt it); and 4) the is no clear path to a green card for these paroled individuals.

To date, the Administration has not “leveraged” other potential legal mechanisms to expedite employment authorization.

One option would be to greatly expand use of the new regulatory authority for USCIS Asylum Officers to grant asylum status to applicants arriving at the border. This would result in immediate admission in an orderly, work-authorized asylum legal status and avoid the current 2.1 million Immigration Court backlog. It also would trigger a statutory process for asylees to apply for green cards after being physically present in the U.S. for one year. Additionally, granting asylum expeditiously at the AO would be available to all asylum applicants, not just those from the four specified nations.

Another option, that could be used in conjunction with the first one, would be to ramp up much more robust and inclusive refugee programs outside the U.S. This could be in the countries in crisis or in third countries. Like asylees, refugees enter the U.S. in a legal status that authorizes them to work immediately. Like asylees, they have access to a statutory provision for obtaining a green card after being physically present in the U.S. for one year. Refugee status is potentially available to refugees from any country where the President finds a “special humanitarian concern” following “consultation” with Congress.

Unfortunately, in my view, the Biden Administration has shown little interest in, nor aptitude for, maximizing the mechanisms available to legally admit refugees, from abroad or as asylum seekers. As pointed out above, doing so also would address the issues in Maine and other states who have welcomed refugees and asylum seekers.

Instead, the Administration has relied on a mishmash of:

Trump-era, nativist, deterrence policies, many with questionable legal basis;
A series of ever-changing, ad hoc, subjective, discretionary “exceptions” to those policies administered without any transparency or accountability;
An ad hoc, nationality specific, parole program divorced from the statutory “refugee” definition, having a much more tenuous legal basis than using the established refugee and asylum admission provisions now in the INA, and certainly leaving the future fate of those “paroled” thereunder “up in the air” and subject to maximum political gamesmanship.

The sum total is to leave too many refugees and asylees, and the individuals and communities in the U.S. trying to help them, “dangling in the air” without the necessary support and humanitarian leadership from the Administration.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-05-22

☠️🏴‍☠️💀⚰️🤮 “SEASON’S GREETINGS” — AS POLITICOS OF BOTH PARTIES FALSELY CLAIM THAT TITLE 42 IS NECESSARY, REMEMBER THAT THEY ARE PROMOTING: 1) Continuing Violation of US & International Laws Protecting Asylum Seekers; 2) Continuing Gross Abuses Of Human Rights; & 3)“[T]he record is replete with stomach-churning evidence of death, torture, and rape.”

Four Horsemen — A HOLIDAY MESSAGE FROM US POLITICOS OF BOTH PARTIES TO LEGAL ASYLUM SEEKERS: “Suffer & Die!”
Albrecht Dürer, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Here are some relevant portions of Judge Sullivan’s opinion in Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, D.D.C., Nov. 22, 2022, to keep in mind as the bogus claims and misleading reporting continue to mushroom ahead of the Dec. 22 (Wednesday) date for re-establishing the rule of law @ our Southern Border:

It is unreasonable for the CDC to assume that it can ignore the consequences of any actions it chooses to take in the pursuit of fulfilling its goals, particularly when those actions included the extraordinary decision to suspend the codified procedural and substantive rights of noncitizens seeking safe harbor. See Huisha-Huisha, 27 F.4th at 724-25 (describing the “procedural and substantive rights” of aliens, such as asylum seekers, “to resist expulsion”); cf. Regents, 140 S. Ct. at 1914-15 (holding that agency should have considered the effect rescission of DACA would have on the program’s recipients prior to the agency making its decision). As Defendants concede, “a Title 42 order involving persons will always have consequences for migrants,” Defs.’ Opp’n, ECF No. 147 at 42, and numerous public comments during the Title 42 policy rulemaking informed CDC that implementation of its orders would likely expel migrants to locations with a “high

29

probability” of “persecution, torture, violent assaults, or rape.” See Pls.’ Mot., ECF No. 144-1 at 27; see also id. at 27- 28 (listing groups subject to expulsion under Title 42, including “survivors of domestic violence and their children, who have endured years of abuse”; “survivors of sexual assault and rape, who are at risk of being stalked, attacked, or murdered by their persecutors in Mexico or elsewhere”; and “LGBTQ+ individuals from countries where their gender identity or sexual orientation is criminalized or for whom expulsion to Mexico or elsewhere makes them prime targets for persecution” (citing AR, ECF No. 154 at 28-29, 47, 153) (cleaned up)). It is undisputed that the impact on migrants was indeed dire. See, e.g., Huisha-Huisha, 27 F.4th at 734 (finding Plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm if expelled to places where they would be persecuted or tortured).

The CDC “has considerable flexibility in carrying out its responsibility,” Regents, 140 S. Ct. at 1914, and the Court is mindful that it “is not to substitute its judgment for that of the agency,” FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 513 (2009). But regardless of the CDC’s conclusion, its decision to ignore the harm that could be caused by issuing its Title 42 orders was arbitrary and capricious.

30

3. The Title 42 Policy Failed to Adequately

Consider Alternatives

Plaintiffs also argue that the Title 42 policy is arbitrary and capricious because CDC failed to adequately consider alternatives and the policy did not rationally serve its stated purpose. See Pls.’ Mot., ECF No. 144-1 at 10-11.

(29-31)

However, despite the above, Defendants have not shown that the risk of migrants spreading COVID-19 is “a real problem.” District of Columbia v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 444 F. Supp. 3d 1, 27 (D.D.C. 2020) (citing Nat’l Fuel Gas Supply Corp. v. FERC, 468 F.3d 831, 841 (D.C. Cir. 2006)). “Professing that an agency action ameliorates a real problem but then citing no evidence demonstrating that there is in fact a problem is not reasoned decisionmaking.” Id. (cleaned up); see Huisha-Huisha, 27 F.4th at 735 (“[W]e would be sensitive to declarations in the record by CDC officials testifying to the efficacy of the § 265 Order. But there are none.”). As Plaintiffs point out, record evidence indicates that “during the first seven months of the Title 42 policy, CBP encountered on average just one migrant per day who tested positive for COVID-19.” Pls.’ Mot., ECF No. 144-1 at 22 (citing Sealed AR, ECF No. 155-1 at 23). In addition, at the time of the August 2021 Order, the rate of daily COVID-19 cases in the United States was almost double the incidence rate in Mexico and substantially higher than the incidence rate in Canada. See 86 Fed. Reg. at 42831 (noting 137.9 daily cases per 100,000 people in the United States, compared to 68.6 in Mexico and 8.0 in Canada). The lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness of the Title 42 policy is especially egregious in view of CDC’s previous conclusion that “the use of quarantine and travel restrictions, in the absence of evidence of their utility, is detrimental to efforts to combat the spread of communicable disease,” Control of Communicable Diseases, 82 Fed.

39

Reg. 6890, 6896; as well as record evidence discussing the “recidivism” created by the Title 42 policy, which actually increased the number of times migrants were encountered by CBP, see AR, ECF No. 154 at 45 (commenter describing recidivism); AR, ECF No. 155-1 at 4 (January/February 2021 statistics showing nearly 40% of family units DHS encountered in January-February 15, 2021 were migrants who had attempted to cross at least once before).

(39-40)

Particularly in view of the harms Plaintiffs face if summarily

expelled to countries they may be persecuted or tortured, the Court

42

therefore vacates the Title 42 policy. Cf. Nat. Res. Def. Council v. EPA, 489 F.3d 1250, 1262–64 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (Randolph, J., concurring) (“A remand-only disposition is, in effect, an indefinite stay of the effectiveness of the court’s decision and agencies naturally treat it as such.”).

(42-43)

Meanwhile, Plaintiffs have presented evidence demonstrating that the rate of summary expulsions pursuant to the Title 42 policy has nearly doubled since September 2021. See Pls.’ Mot., ECF No. 144-1 at 30 (“At the time of this Court’s original decision, approximately 14% of

45

families encountered at the southwest border were being summarily expelled pursuant to the Title 42 policy. . . . Now, the rate of expulsions is nearly twice as high, reaching 27%.”); see also Pls.’ Reply, ECF No. 149-1 at 31 (“[I]n the month of July 2022 alone, 9,574 members of family units encountered at the southern border were summarily expelled pursuant to the Title 42 policy.”). And “[i]n Mexico alone, recorded incidents” of “kidnapping, rapes, and other violence against noncitizens subject to Title 42” have “spiked from 3,250 cases in June 2021 to over 10,318 in June 2022.” Pls.’ Mot., ECF No. 144-1 at 30 (citing Neusner Decl., ECF No. 118-4; Human Rights First, The Nightmare Continues: Title 42 Court Order Prolongs Human Rights Abuses, Extends Disorder at U.S. Borders, at 3-4 (June 2022)). Accordingly, even if the Court accepts Defendants’ unsupported statement that the “situation for class members has improved,” the evidence demonstrates that Plaintiffs continue to face irreparable harm that is beyond remediation. See Huisha-Huisha, 27 F.4th at 733 (“[T]he record is replete with stomach-churning evidence of death, torture, and rape.”).

N

(45-46)

Because “there is an overriding public interest . . . in the general importance of an agency’s faithful adherence to its statutory mandate,” Jacksonville Port Auth. v. Adams, 556 F.2d 52, 59 (D.C. Cir. 1977); the Court concludes that an injunction in this case would serve the public interest, see A.B.-B. v. Morgan, No. 20-cv-846, 2020 WL 5107548, at *9 (D.D.C. Aug. 31, 2020) (“[T]he Government and public can have little interest in executing removal orders that are based on statutory violations . . . .”).

Moreover, Defendants do not contend that issuing a

permanent injunction would cause them harm or be inconsistent

with the public health. Indeed, “CDC recognizes that the current

public health conditions no longer require the continuation of

47

the August 2021 order,” Defs.’ Opp’n, ECF No. 147 at 44; see also Pls.’ Mot., ECF No. 144-1 at 30, in view of the “less burdensome measures that are now available,” 87 Fed Reg. at 19944; id. at 19949–50. The parties also do not dispute that Plaintiffs continue to face substantial harm if they are returned to their home countries, notwithstanding the availability of USCIS screenings. See, e.g., Human Rights First, The Nightmare Continues: Title 42 Court Order Prolongs Human Rights Abuses, Extends Disorder at U.S. Borders, at 3-4 (June 2022). As the Supreme Court has explained, the public has a strong interest in “preventing aliens from being wrongfully removed, particularly to countries where they are likely to face substantial harm.” Nken, 556 U.S. at 436.

(47-48)

***********************************

So, when you hear guys like Abbott, Ducey, DeSantis, Manchin, Cuellar, Gonzales, GOP nativist AGs, and the like use this holiday season during which we are supposed to be celebrating messages of hope, faith, mercy, and “goodwill toward men” to extol the virtues of illegal expulsions under Title 42, remember what their are REALLY saying:

“I want the US to continue violating domestic and international laws protecting refugees and asylum seekers, to continue to knowingly violate the human rights and human dignity of asylum seekers, and to place our fellow humans in danger zones where they will suffer stomach-churning episodes of death, torture, and rape. I don’t believe our nation is capable of complying with our duly-enacted laws to protect refugees and asylum seekers that have been in effect since 1981 until 2020 when they were illegally suspended by the Trump Administration using a public health pretext, as found by a Federal Judge. I urge the Biden Administration, which has already illegally expelled hundreds of thousands of migrants with no due process, to continue committing grotesque violations of the law and human rights and to increase the violations so that more men, women, and children will suffer rape, torture, an dearth as a consequence. This is my holiday season message to America and humanity: Peace on earth and goodwill toward all mankind, EXCEPT those seeking legal asylum by applying at our Southern Border. To them: rape, torture, and death without due process!

Title 42 expulsions of asylum seekers are a clear violation of Judeo-Christian ethics. To be advocating for its continuing application at any time, let alone during this season, is the height of hypocrisy; so is characterizing the largely self-inflicted mess at the Southern Border as a “humanitarian emergency” and then proposing to “solve” it by sending legal asylum seekers back to rape, torture, kidnapping, robbery, extortion, and death in Mexico and other nations in turmoil without any type of process to determine whether they have a “credible fear” of persecution, as required by law.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

12-19-22

🗽DISSENTING OPINION: TRADING AWAY REFUGEE RIGHTS & DUE PROCESS FOR LONG OVERDUE DREAMER PROTECTIONS IS “NOT OK!”

By Paul Wickham Schmidt

Courtside Exclusive

Dec. 6, 2022

I dissent.

I was outraged when I read in this morning’s Washington Post about the horrible “Sinema/Tillis misnamed immigration compromise” (actually a “sellout”) being negotiated during the lame duck session of Congress. In short, that proposal apparently would trade long overdue protection for “Dreamers” for the rights and lives of refugees and asylum seekers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/12/05/congress-working-strike-last-minute-immigration-deals/

Incredibly, in the face of U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan’s findings that the intentional illegal use of Title 42 had resulted in countless clear violations of the legal rights of asylum seekers, subjecting them to a litany of horrors and abuses that he described as “dire harm,” these legislators would extend those abuses for an indefinite period! That’s notwithstanding evidence not only of the irreparable harm that Title 42 has caused, but also the rather obvious fact that once we “normalize” those abuses, they will never end.

There will always be another fabricated reason for extending the Title 42 charade. Indeed, once we start mischaracterizing abuse as “law,” we can’t even call it “abuse” and hold the abusers accountable! That’s all part of the dehumanizing or “Dred Scottification” process!

Additionally, in the place of a functioning working asylum and refugee system, the proposal would eventually substitute so called “processing centers” and “expedited procedures” to railroad asylum seekers out of the country without due process. And, it wouldn’t address the total dysfunction and denial of due process in our Immigration “Courts” by enacting another long overdue provision: the “Lofgren Article I Immigration court bill!” What a farce!

Let’s be clear about what’s happening here! The legal and human rights of refugees and asylum seekers are not “ours” to trade away for relief for another deserving group that has long been irrationally denied! “Processing centers” are a euphemism for “immigration prisons” — part of the “New American Gulag.” “Expedited processing” is a euphemism for “railroading.” Both detention and artificially expediting dockets have been proven to be ineffective and unjust, over and over. Yet, here we go again!

My outrage turned to shock and dismay when I learned that some erstwhile defenders of due process, human rights, and racial justice for asylum seekers (incredibly) thought that this type of immoral compromise was a “good idea!” Not me!

Restrictionist/nativist Dems masquerading as “moderates” are a huge problem. They play right into the GOP’s hands.

When committing crimes against humanity or giving away refugees’ rights becomes a “strategy,” “option,” or “bargaining chip,” we’re lost as a nation. And, that’s exactly where we’re heading with horrible, immoral proposals like this.

Human rights and due process are non-negotiable! And, I guarantee that extending Title 42, building additional Gulag (rather than making the existing legal asylum and refugee systems work), and railroading asylum seekers will empower smugglers and lead to further growth of our underground population.

Human migration won’t be stopped by ineffective and immoral “deterrence.” And, although many hate the idea, refugees basically “self-select” and are driven by forces beyond our immediate control.

Refugees are, by definition, folks who can’t return! So, there is no reason to believe that true refugees (of which there are many) are going to be “deterred.” They might be “incentivized” to seek refuge in particular, relatively safe, places; but, nobody seems interested in a “carrot” approach — even though the “stick approach” has failed and continues to do so!

Look at the folks who continue to die in vessels in the Mediterranean even though they are fully aware that they are unwanted and that the EU will stop at no cruelty to keep them out.

And, examine the wealth of documentation that folks forced to “remain in Mexico” — and apply under what we know to be a corrupt and inadequate system — are systematically abused and exploited.

This time, we’re not just “pushing the St. Louis out to sea.” We’re torpedoing her and watching the passengers drown. And Dems are a huge part of the problem!

Other (soon to be former) progressive Democrats might choose to “go along to get along” with heaping additional abuses on largely defenseless refugees and asylum seekers. But, not me! I dissent!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-06-22

🤯🏴‍☠️🤡🤮👎🏽INCOMPETENCE WATCH: Lacking Integrity & Skills To Follow The Law, Tone-Deaf, Dangerous, & Disingenuous Biden Immigration Officials Consider Additional Massive Violations Of Human Rights For Asylum Seekers! — ACLU & NDPA Ready To Resist Administration’s Latest Unwarranted Assaults on Human Rights, Common Sense, & Human Decency!

Who would have thought that the Biden Administration would be dumb and treacherous enough to let this neo-Nazi xenophobe and refugee hater “own” human rights “policy” in a Dem Administration? But, it appears they have! Attribution: Stephen Miller Monster by Peter Kuper, PoliticalCartoons.com

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/01/us/politics/biden-immigration-asylum-restrictions.html

From Michael Shear & Eileen Sullivan the NY Times:

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration is considering substantial new limits on the number of migrants who could apply for asylum in the United States, according to people familiar with the proposal, which would expand restrictions similar to those first put in place along the border by former President Donald J. Trump.

The plan is one of several being debated by President Biden’s top aides as the country confronts a high number of illegal crossings at the border. It would prohibit migrants who are fleeing persecution from seeking refuge in the United States unless they were first denied safe harbor by another country, like Mexico.

People familiar with the discussions said the new policy, if adopted, could go into effect as soon as this month, just as the government stops using a public health rule that was put in place at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic by the Trump administration and became a key policy to manage the spike in crossings during Mr. Biden’s tenure. A federal judge has ordered the administration to stop using the health rule on Dec. 21.

But the idea of broadly prohibiting migrants from seeking asylum strikes directly at the heart of decades of American and international law that has shaped the United States’ role as a place of safety for displaced and fearful people across the globe.

. . . .

*****************************

Read the complete article at the link.

[U.S. District Judge Emmet ]Sullivan wrote that the federal officials knew the order “would likely expel migrants to locations with a ‘high probability’ of ‘persecution, torture, violent assaults, or rape’ ” — and did so anyway.

“It is unreasonable for the CDC to assume that it can ignore the consequences of any actions it chooses to take in the pursuit of fulfilling its goals,” Sullivan wrote. “It is undisputed that the impact on migrants was indeed dire.”

What part of Judge Sullivan’s very clear ruling on their “crimes against humanity” and knowing violations of U.S. and international law doesn’t the “Biden Administration Clown Show” 🤡 understand? Just follow the asylum law and due process, already! If you can’t do that, resign and let folks who can do the job (of which there are plenty out here in the “real world”) take over and do the job you have been failing at for two years!

In any event, the talent is out here in the private/NGO sector and will resist this latest insult to humanity and degradation of the rule of law and due process that Administration officials are “pondering!” “Studying and deciding whether or not to violate the law (again)?” Sounds like a potential criminal conspiracy to me!

In any event, expert litigators like Lee Gelernt of the ACLU and other NDPA superstars are prepared to “beat the Biden Administration’s brains (if any) out” in court again if they try to implement any more of their illegal and immoral immigration gimmicks!

“If the Biden administration simply substitutes the unlawful and anti-asylum Trump transit ban for Title 42,” Mr. Gelernt said, “we will immediately sue, as we successfully did during the Trump administration.”

The Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations committee was also “not on board” with the Biden Administration’s latest harebrained ideas on diminishing human rights that they have substituted for basic competence over the past two years of disasters, and unforgivable policy screw-ups on immigration, human rights, and racial justice issues:

“If the reported story is true, the Biden administration would further step away from our nation’s commitment to offer refuge to asylum seekers,” Senator Bob Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey and the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement on Thursday. “I will firmly oppose this misguided attempt to rewrite our asylum laws without congressional approval, just as I firmly opposed the same efforts under President Trump.”

I also have to wonder how Judge Sullivan will react when he learns how Biden Administration officials are using his “reluctantly granted” five weeks of delay in implementing his “cease and desist order.” Instead of, at long last, getting their collective tails in gear to finally put in place a competent legal system for re-establishing legal asylum at the southern border, these disgraceful petty bureaucrats and so-called “policy” officials have been scheming to evade the rule of law and commit yet more “crimes against humanity.”

The NDPA is not going to let them get away with it. Even if it means ripping apart the “so-called Democratic Coalition” going into the 2024 elections!

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever! Tyranny & Stupidity From either Dems or the GOP, never!

PWS

12-05-22

🇺🇸🗽⚖️😎 CATHERINE WINS, DEMS HOLD SENATE, IN HUGE WIN FOR DEMOCRACY, DECENCY! — FIRST ELECTED LATINA SEN. CORTEZ MASTO (D-NV) NARROWLY HOLDS OFF RIGHT-WING CHALLENGE FROM TRUMP-BACKED LAXALT!

Hannah Knowles and Liz Goodwin report for WashPost:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/11/12/senate-control-democrats-win/

Democrats were projected to retain control of the Senate on Saturday, clinching a narrow majority as they showed strength in battleground races in a daunting midterm year that handed President Biden a major victory as he looks to his next two years in office.

The final blow to Republican hopes of retaking the chamber came in Nevada, where on Saturday Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D) was projected to win reelection, edging past Adam Laxalt (R), a former state attorney general. Cortez Masto’s projected win ensures Democrats a 50th seat, with a runoff election still to come in Georgia on Dec. 6. Vice President Harris is empowered to cast tiebreaking votes in the Senate.

Control of the House was still up in the air on Saturday, as vote counting continued days after an election in which Democrats overperformed expectations in many contested areas across the country. Democratic control of the Senate dashes GOP hopes of a full takeover on Capitol Hill.

That’s welcome news for Biden, who was staring down the possibility of humbling defeats as the election neared. Now, the Senate, which oversees the confirmation of executive branch personnel and federal judges, will stay in his party’s corner. A Senate majority will also give the president and his party more say over legislative debates on domestic and foreign spending and other major issues.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the results a “vindication” for Democrats and their agenda, and said Republicans had turned off voters with extremism and “negativity,” including some candidates’ false insistence that the 2020 election had been stolen. “America showed that we believed in our democracy,” he told reporters in New York, while praising the quality of Democratic incumbents.

Cortez Masto announced she would deliver a victory speech on Sunday.

In Nevada, Cortez Masto’s win was part of a perfect record so far by incumbent senators seeking reelection in the midterms, as voters tilted strongly against upending the established order in the chamber. It was part of a strong showing by Democrats in battleground areas where Republicans fell short after emphasizing rising prices and concerns about crime during an era of one-party control in Washington.

. . . .

*************************

Importantly, Biden & Sen. Chuck Schumer will retain authority to appoint better qualified, progressive, Federal Judges from diverse backgrounds, schools, and experiences to counteract the toxic influx of poorly qualified far-right jurists, many ideologues hand-picked by the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation for their extremist, anti-democracy, far right views that threaten the credibility and the legitimacy of the Federal Judiciary.

Biden’s & Schumer’s attention and success at timely appointing and advancing exceptionally well-qualified Article III judges whose views support and advance the rule of law, equal justice for all, and reasonable legal interpretations has been one of the “under the radar” success stories of his first two years. For once, if perhaps a little late in the game, the Dems have treated Federal Judicial appointments with the same urgency, strategic thinking, and determination to fundamentally reshape the judiciary as the GOP!

If only Garland had paid the same attention to reforming, improving, and reshaping the Immigration Judiciary to make expertise, due process, fundamental fairness, and best judicial practices paramount after four years of highly questionable judicial appointments and “packing” of the BIA by Sessions and Barr in support of their nativist, anti-immigrant agenda!

Senator Cortez Masto’s victory also saves America from another round of Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-TN) as majority leader. Additionally, it’s a well-deserved setback for arrogant GOP Senate campaign honcho Rick Scott (R-FL) — a guy whose idea of America is to block all progress, steal from the poor, give to the rich, and never give an honest answer.

All and all, it’s a good night for American democracy, although the narrowness of Dem victories despite the obvious superiority of Dem candidates should serve as a warning sign that our nation is not out of the “far-right woods” by any means. Next, it remains critically important for the Dems to re-elect Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA, an outstanding and articulate spokesperson for democratic values over the spectacularly incoherent and unqualified Trump-backed GOP challenger Herschel Walker in December’s Georgia runoff. A one-vote “cushion” is critical in the event of death or incapacity of any of the Dem Senators.

Importantly, voters across America rejected every corrupt Trump election denier running on the GOP ticket for positions that would have given them control over state elections.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

11-13-22

🆘 SOS FROM ROUND TABLE’S 🛡 ⚔️ JUDGE SUE ROY: COMPLETE DUE ROCESS MELTDOWN @ EOIR NEWARK, AS GARLAND’S LEADERSHIP CONTINUES TO FAIL! ☠️☠️ — Garland Has Managed To Bring AILA & ICE Together In Outrage Over His Dangerous, Gross Mismanagement Of The Immigration Courts!🤯

Hon. Susan G. Roy
Law Office of Susan G. Roy, LLC
Princeton Junction, NJ
Member, Round Table of Former Immigration Judges

My colleague Sue writes:

Hi,

First, can someone please share with the RT as a whole? I can’t do it from where I am at the moment.

Second, yes, believe it or not, Newark EOIR is implementing a “policy” (if you can call it that, since it hasn’t been written anywhere) starting Monday, October 3, 2022, that ALL DHS and Respondents’ attorneys must appear IN PERSON for almost EVERY case, including master calendar hearings. Their stated reason? “Webex bandwidth issues.” This is the Court that started Webex. This is the Court that caused the death of at least one person (and in fact 4 people ultimately died) and the severe illness of many more, because of its court policies at the beginning of the pandemic. And Newark EOIR’s completely unsafe and short-sighted policy just last year is what generated the lawsuit filed by AILA-NJ against EOIR.

The OPLA attorneys’ union and AILA-NJ have issued a JOINT press release (which is attached) after a joint letter to David Neal unfortunately did not resolve the issue. The NJ State Bar Association has also submitted a letter to Director Neal. (Also attached).

In fact, the Newark EOIR policy flies in the face of the DM issued by Director Neal himself regarding the use of WebEx throughout the nation’s immigration courts.

Some Newark IJs have already begun denying ALL WebEx motions for both DHS and Respondents’ attorneys, regardless of the reason behind the motion (such as, undergoing chemotherapy; receiving treatment for heart conditions; or having oral argument scheduled before the U.S. Court of Appeals on the same day, just to give some examples).

In any event, feel free to share widely and publicly. The Chair of AILA-NJ this year is Jason Camilo, who I have cc’d on this email just so he is aware.

Happy Friday!

Sue

********************

Here’s the joint letter letter from AILA & ICE:

PROSECUTORS AND ATTORNEYS

CALL FOR CONTINUATION OF VIRTUAL HEARINGS AND OPPOSE CHANGE IN POLICY IN NEWARK IMMIGRATION COURT

New Jersey – Both AILA NJ and AFGE Local 511 (ICE Professionals Union) call on the Newark Immigration Court, part of the U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), to continue to allow virtual hearings for all attorneys and immigrants, in all cases, without exception. These attorneys are opposed to the recently- announced policy of the Newark Immigration Court requiring all attorneys to either return in person to hearings beginning on October 3, 2022 or to seek waiver of in-person appearance for good cause. Public safety requires virtual hearings, especially for routine preliminary hearings that generate large groups of people in small courtrooms.

This new policy goes far beyond the policies of all other New Jersey court systems, from municipal courts, State courts, and federal courts, and puts everyone at risk—prosecutors, attorneys, court staff, immigrants, and the public at large. Federal and New Jersey State Courts are still operating almost entirely virtually, with exceptions only for criminal jury trials and some other specific proceedings. “EOIR’s new policy of making everyone return to the courtroom in person is dangerous and unjustified,” says Jason Scott Camilo, Chair of AILA NJ. Newark EOIR is not just requiring in-person appearances for contested individual hearings; it is requiring attorneys to appear in person at master calendar hearings as well, which can involve 50-60 cases per judge, per courtroom, every morning and afternoon. Thus, literally hundreds of people will once again be forced into small, unventilated courtrooms and narrow hallways every single day.

Sadly, this is not the first time Newark EOIR has tried to force prosecutors, attorneys, and the public into the courtroom during the pandemic. Numerous people contracted COVID-19 as a result of attending immigration court proceedings in March 2020. One well-respected AILA NJ member passed away as a result, and several people became seriously ill. Other federal workers at the same federal building have also succumbed to the disease. This is in addition to those who suffered and still suffer from long COVID complications.

Despite this, Newark EOIR compelled people back into courtrooms in July 2020. New Jersey immigration attorneys and the New Jersey Chapter of American Immigration Lawyers Association, (AILA NJ), sued EOIR on July 31, 2020 in Federal District Court, New Jersey,

seeking protection from EOIR!s first attempt compelling attorneys to appear in person during the pandemic. Due to this suit, Newark EOIR committed to providing attorneys with remote videoconferencing for the duration of the pandemic and to troubleshoot and address any glitches or interruptions in its use. All Immigration Courts nationwide soon adopted internet based hearings as the default for cases.

Since August 2020, prosecutors, attorneys, and immigrants have been appearing remotely, and, according to polling conducted by AILA NJ, the vast majority of internet-based hearings are proceeding without issue. Secretary Becerra of the United States Health & Human Services recently announced the continuation of the nationwide public health emergency on July 15, 2022. More than 34,000 New Jerseyans have died from COVID-19; over 2,500 people a day are still falling ill in New Jersey alone.

Acknowledging the benefits of internet-based hearings, David L. Neal, Director of EOIR, issued guidance on August 11, 2022, indicating that “all immigration courts have the capacity to hold such hearings…,” that “internet-based hearings have proven a valuable safety measure during the pandemic, as immigration judges can conduct such hearings without requiring groups of people to congregate in a courtroom…,” and that “EOIR anticipates that, going forward, internet-based hearings will remain essential to EOIR’s operations.”

“In fact, EOIR has been holding stakeholder meetings across the country to explain the continued benefits of utilizing Webex in immigration court proceedings. Why, then, would Newark EOIR, which was the first immigration court in the nation to use the WebEx system, suddenly choose to abandon it? Logically and logistically, this makes no sense,” explained Jason Scott Camilo.

Virtual hearings provide other benefits as well. Virtual hearings allow the courts to efficiently process more cases safely. Private attorneys and pro bono organizations are able to represent immigrants more effectively, having the ability to beam into various courtrooms in different locations in a single day.

According to AFGE Local 511, virtual court appearances enable prosecutors to minimize their exposure to hundreds of people in crowded courtrooms every day, while having more time to allocate their limited resources towards resolving cases outside the courtroom in motion practice and in consultation with opposing counsel. OPLA offices are understaffed, and virtual courtrooms enable telework, which in turn permits them to better manage their out of court duties, which primarily consist of efforts to reduce the immigration court backlog. “It makes no sense to hinder government attorneys attempting to assist EOIR in resolving cases ,” said AFGE Local 511’s Executive Vice President, Ginnine Fried, who is assigned to the Newark office.

Newark EOIR’s newly-announced policy requiring attorneys to appear in person or request a waiver is in direct opposition to the resolution of the federal lawsuit, is in direct opposition to the policy of the EOIR Director and, if implemented on October 3, 2022 as planned, will imperil the

health and safety of all who will be forced to appear in person. No other court in the state has taken such radical action. AILA NJ attorneys and AFGE Local 511 attorneys agree there is no valid public policy reason to implement this drastic change, and numerous public policy reasons to continue with virtual immigration court hearings: public safety, increased court efficiency, and uniformity. Standing united, these opposing sides are beseeching the Newark EOIR to let safety prevail and to preserve the health of those Americans working to preserve a fair and equitable Immigration system.

***************

Here’s the text of a letter to Director Neal from the NJ State Bar:

September 29, 2022

Sent via email to david.neal@usdoj.gov

Director David L. Neal

Executive Office for Immigration Review U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530-0001

Dear Director Neal:

NEW JERSEY STATE BAR ASSOCIATION

JERALYN L. LAWRENCE, PRESIDENT Lawrence Law LLC 776 Mountain Boulevard, Suite 202 Watchung, NJ 07069 908-645-1000 • FAX: 908-645-1001 jlawrence@lawlawfirm.com

On behalf of the New Jersey State Bar Association, which includes immigration attorneys among its 16,000 attorney members, I write to seek reconsideration of the policy change the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) has scheduled to implement in Newark, NJ, on Oct. 3, 2022. After more than two years of successful Webex Master Calendar hearings, EOIR will again require immigration attorneys to appear in person. While vague Webex bandwidth issues have been cited as the impetus for the change, there has been no stated reason why EIOR will not default to the prior practice of holding Master Calendar hearings telephonically. To be sure, there are legitimate concerns about the ability to judge credibility or simultaneous interpretation in certain telephonic immigration hearings, but those issues are not in play here as EOIR has waived clients’ appearance in Master Calendar hearings. Reverting to the pre-pandemic, inflexible court appearance requirements is both unnecessary, in light of back-up telephonic hearing capabilities, and presents costly time and monetary burdens to attorneys and respondents.

I. EOIR HAS SUCCESSFULLY HELD WEBEX HEARINGS SINCE THE HEIGHT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN 2020.

EOIR Newark began Webex hearings in summer 2020 because of litigation filed by New Jersey immigration attorneys in the New Jersey chapter of Association of Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) on July 31, 2020, in the District Court of New Jersey, Newark Vicinage. That suit sought protection from EOIR Newark’s order compelling attorneys to appear in person during the pandemic. As a result of this litigation, Assistant Chief Immigration Judge David Cheng (ACIJ Cheng) of the New Jersey Immigration Court, and on behalf of EOIR Newark, committed to providing attorneys with remote videoconferencing for the duration of the pandemic. As part of the parties’ stipulation for dismissal, the parties agreed to the following:

New Jersey Law Center • One Constitution Square • New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901-1520 732-249-5000 • FAX: 732-249-2815 • EMAIL: president@njsba.com • njsba.com

WHEREAS, PM 21-03 further provides that, “[o]nce WebEx compatibility is available at an immigration court, for the duration of the declared national emergency related to COVID-19, either party may file a motion for the alien or the representative for either party to appear at a hearing by VTC through WebEx rather than in person,” see id.; and

WHEREAS, PM 21-03 further provides that motions to appear at a hearing by VTC through WebEx for any party or party attorney/representative, like motions for telephone appearances, are “subject to the discretion of the immigration judge, any applicable law and any applicable requirements of the ICPM [Immigration Court Practice Manual], a standing order, or a local operating procedure,” see PM 21-03 at p. 4.

See Stipulation for Dismissal, Docket 44, dated Feb. 16, 2021 (Docket No. 2:20-cv-09748- JMV-JBC) (emphasis added), attached hereto as Exhibit A.

In the wake of that consent order, EOIR Newark joined all other state and federal courts in New Jersey in operating virtually during the pandemic. In practice, and pursuant to ACIJ Cheng’s Standing Order dated June 19, 2020, all Master Calendar hearings were held telephonically, without the need for a motion, and all respondents’ appearances were waived if an attorney appeared on their behalf. See Standing Order dated June 19, 2020, attached hereto as Exhibit B. This Standing Order was rescinded pursuant to ACIJ Cheng’s Standing Order on Dec. 28, 2021, effective Jan. 10, 2022, at which time Master Calendar hearings changed from being held telephonically to being held via Webex. As it was before, these were without the need for a motion, and all respondents’ appearances continued to be waived if an attorney appeared on their behalf. See Standing Order dated Dec. 28, 2021, attached hereto as Exhibit C.

Even today, many court operations across New Jersey continue to be virtual. To name a few, state municipal matters are being managed remotely, except for DUIs and trials, and in Superior Court, non-consequential hearings such as preliminary appearances and status conferences continue to be held remotely.1 The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey extended its standing order on Aug. 8, 2022, regarding virtual hearings for criminal proceedings.2

Additionally, EOIR itself has acknowledged the benefits of internet-based hearings, for which Newark was a national leader in its overall success as a pilot program jurisdiction. On Aug. 11, 2022, EOIR issued Director’s Memorandum 22-07.3 That stated, “all immigration courts have the capacity to hold such hearings…,” and “internet-based hearings have proven a valuable safety measure during the pandemic, as immigration judges can conduct such hearings without requiring groups of people to congregate in a courtroom…” The memo cites the benefits of internet-based hearings, including that “Respondents and counsel appearing remotely are

1 See njcourts.gov/public/covid19_one-stop.html#court_hearings, last accessed Sept. 27, 2022.

2 See njd.uscourts.gov/sites/njd/files/CARESActSOSixthExt.ofSO2021-03.pdf, last accessed Sept. 27, 2022. 3 See justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1525691/download, last accessed Sept 27, 2022.

-2-

relieved from traveling to court.” Finally, the memo said that “EOIR anticipates that, going forward, internet-based hearings will remain essential to EOIR’s operations.”

II. EOIR NEWARK INTENDS TO SUSPEND STANDARD WEBEX HEARINGS ON OCT. 3, 2022, WITHOUT PROPER NOTICE TO THE BAR, INCLUDING NJSBA.

Notwithstanding the above, the EOIR seeks to disband the standard for Webex hearings without proper notice to New Jersey attorneys and their clients who will be substantially and disproportionately affected by this sudden policy shift. The NJSBA only learned of this policy through its affiliate AILA NJ members when the committee chair for AILA NJ announced the new policy to its members by email on Aug. 30, 2022. The email was supplemented on Aug. 31, 2022, and again Sept. 8, 2022. The below paragraphs, taken from our AILA NJ colleagues’ letter to EOIR leadership, contain the entirety of the new policy, which was communicated via the emails referenced above.

From the Aug. 30, 2022 Email from EOIR Committee Chair:

The standing order for Webex hearings is revoked and in person appearances required as of 10/3/22. This of course is subject to exceptions and variations as follows:

1. Webex hearings will continue for all cases heard by Judge Ranasinghe and Judge Jeannopolous

2. Judge Pierro and Judge Chen will have in person master calendars and Webex merits hearings.

3. Judges Rubin, Rastegar, Riefkohl, Finston, Wilson and Lane will have in person hearings master and merits.

4. Represented respondents’ appearances are waived for master calendars like they are now on Webex masters, but not for merits hearings. This includes cases where an attorney is already on record or making his/her first appearance. Atty shows up, the respondent does not have to appear. If you are hired at the last minute and can’t make it, the respondent has to appear.

5. This does not apply to Elizabeth hearings as the facility does not admit visitors, all remote hearings.

6. If it is Judge Shirole or Pope and the hearing notice is for Newark, (DD Case), in person at Newark. Any doubts about Shirole call Elizabeth. Pope will all be in person.

7. You can still file a motion for a Webex hearing for good cause but it MUST be filed 15 days or before. If it is not granted you have to

-3-

appear. I am told the reason for this is the Webex bandwidth is incapable of handling the level of internet traffic that has developed. The system is crashing constantly. More and more attorneys are using it with technical issues constantly. So the “good cause” issue will be a major consideration in granting or denying motions for Webex calendars.

From August 31, 2022 Email from EOIR Committee Chair:

1. DHS has to appear in person and they will be required to file motions for Webex.

2. I failed to include ACIJ Cheng and IJ Mullican among the list of judges where in person appearances are required.

From September 8, 2022 Email from EOIR Committee Chair:

ACIJ Cheng has rephrased the “good cause” language requirement for a Webex motion. He chooses to phrase it as “there has to be a reason”.

See AILA New Jersey letter dated Sept. 23, 2022, attached hereto as Exhibit D.

III. THE NEW POLICY FAILS TO PROVIDE PROPER NOTICE TO NEW JERSEY ATTORNEYS AND IT IS IN CONFLICT WITH PRINCIPLES OF EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE, DUE PROCESS AND FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS.

EOIR Newark failed to circulate a general notice to the entire bar of the policy change and thereby limited the ability of all practitioners to learn of the change in a timely fashion.

Indeed,

unless immigration attorneys are members of AILA NJ, which some, but not all NJSBA Immigration Law Section members are, they might still be unaware of this abrupt change in policy, which will prejudice them and their clients. To date, EOIR Newark has not published a formal standing order to officially announce it. This lack of notice will hinder equal access to the justice system for countless respondents whose attorneys are not aware of the sweeping changes

made to the practice. As our AILA NJ colleagues adeptly stated, notice of these changes should come directly from EOIR Newark in the form of a standing order, notice to the bar, website update, or other written statement. Further, the new policy is confusing and complicated in its

implementation.

This new policy also denies equal access to justice because of the effect it will have on attorneys’ fees. The fees for appearing at Master Calendar hearings in person, rather than virtually, will be markedly more expensive, and needlessly so, for immigration clients. Although clients’ appearance would be waived, the time attorneys spend to appear in person will be exponentially greater than that spent at a Webex appearance. In immigration removal proceedings, where respondents have no right to court-appointed counsel, many clients will find it cost prohibitive to pay an attorney for protracted appearances at Master Calendar hearings in Newark. An additional

-4-

consequence may be that seasoned immigration attorneys would limit the removal defense cases

they accept that require needless Newark appearances.

Consistency in agency practices is a hallmark of due process and fundamental fairness. Respondents and attorneys should be able to rely on established policies and practices and conform their behavior accordingly. To be clear, changes should be announced with reasonable notice and ample breadth to the entire legal community. EOIR Newark’s decision to change course without prior, reasonable notice will have serious economic and practical consequences to immigration attorneys and their clients.

IV. THE NEW POLICY WILL BE UNNECESSARILY BURDENSOME AND WILL RESULT IN ADDITIONAL BACKLOGS AND INEFFICIENCIES THROUGHOUT THE IMMIGRATION COURT SYSTEM.

The new EOIR Newark policy will burden immigration attorneys by immediately requiring them to appear in person in Newark for Master Calendar hearings while their clients’ appearances remain waived. A Master Calendar hearing in Immigration Court is the equivalent to a status conference in most other litigation-based practice areas. They are administrative, taking approximately five to 15 minutes to complete. This will place a heavy burden on immigration attorneys across New Jersey all of whom will again be required to be physically present on the 12th Floor of EOIR Newark, which is New Jersey’s sole immigration court, by 8:30 a.m. on any given weekday for a hearing that will likely last fewer than 15 minutes. This change will be a hardship for attorneys from the south, such as an attorney from Cape May who would have to travel 148 miles to Newark, as well as those from the north, such as an attorney from Montague

who would have to travel 59 miles to Newark, all for a brief hearing.

A silver lining of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the legal community’s embrace of technology. Attorneys and courts alike learned, adopted, and then mastered a more efficient process to effectively practice law. There is no reason to revert to antiquated, unnecessary practices. Health concerns aside, appearing for Master Calendar hearings via Webex has proven to be a much more efficient process that reallocates attorneys’ time into their files and clients’ valuable financial resources. If Webex is experiencing bandwidth issues, telephonic Master

Calendar hearings should be the back-up policy for attorneys rather than in person Master Calendar hearings. Immigration attorneys rely on Webex hearings to manage their practices, caseloads and clients’ schedules and expectations. Immigration attorneys have relied on the belief that EOIR Newark’s Master Calendar hearings would be handled in a remote fashion and have entered into retainer agreements with clients with fee estimates that do not contemplate in- person appearances, have scheduled their calendars, and accepted other court hearing dates, upon that belief. This new policy, which is being implemented in a haphazard manner, creates numerous conflicts, requiring voluminous motion practice to correct. The new policy would upend these successfully established practices on which attorneys, their staff, and their clients

have come to rely over the last two years.

The new policy states that motions to appear via Webex will be entertained, but that they must enumerate a “reason for the request.” Requiring a motion requesting a virtual hearing on every Master Calendar hearing, where an attorney may have dozens in any given week, is an

-5-

overwhelming and unnecessary burden. Additionally, the court, and its already backlogged docket, will be flooded with motions for virtual hearings. The most likely reality is that a majority of attorney motions requesting Webex appearances would be undecided by the date of the appearance. That would lead to a stressful situation each week in which immigration attorneys cannot properly plan their schedules and calendars because they do not know whether or how the immigration judge has ruled on their motion, and whether an in-person appearance will be necessary. Additionally, calling EOIR Newark to ascertain an immigration judge’s decision on a pending Webex motion is, and will continue to be, an unreliable practice strategy. Court staff are already far too busy with court administration to field dozens of additional calls

from immigration attorneys each day relating to these issues.

EOIR should continue to permit immigration attorneys to appear for Master Calendar hearings via Webex as standard policy, without a motion. Although EOIR Newark has cited bandwidth concerns as an impetus for the sudden return to in person hearings, it has failed to set forth any basis for not defaulting to the process of holding Master Calendar hearings telephonically nor any substantive reasoning to support the policy that an attorney’s in-person appearance at a Master Calendar hearing is vital to the judicial process. Indeed, prior to the Dec. 21, 2021, EOIR Newark standing order to conduct Master Calendar hearings by Webex, all Master Calendar hearings were handled successfully via telephone, with the respondent’s appearance waived. If bandwidth upgrades are a concern, EOIR Newark should temporarily reinstate that practice and hold Master Calendar hearings with immigration attorneys via telephone until Webex bandwidth

issues are rectified.

Once again, the NJSBA urges this court to permit hearings for all Master Calendar hearings to be held telephonically or via Webex, without the need for a motion. When we learn and implement a better process, we should embrace that spirit of innovation and creative problem solving rather than revert to antiquated processes. We look forward to working with EOIR Newark to find solutions that allow the court to efficiently accomplish its work and best serve the litigants who appear before it.

Very truly yours,

Jeralyn L. Lawrence, Esq.

President, New Jersey State Bar Association

Cc: Hon. David Cheng, Assistant Chief Immigration Judge, EOIR Newark (sent via email to david.cheng@dhs.gov)

-6-

********************

One of my reliable sources in the DMV area says that DHS is predicting the same awful “bandwidth” mess at the newly opened “Sterling Immigration Court.” How does a judicial system open “new courts” and mass reschedule cases without checking out basics like “bandwidth capacity” in advance? Total, inexcusable incompetence!

Sadly, this is not a surprise to those of us who have been blasting Garland’s horrible failure to make the glaringly obvious (to all but him) systemic, structural, and personnel changes to restore at least a modicum of due process in his failed “court system” — America’s worst courts, as I have been saying over and over.

When are Dems in Congress finally going to provide some meaningful oversight and force Garland to answer tough questions about his “due process disgrace” @ EOIR? Senator Booker and Senator Menendez, where are you?

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

09-30-22

EYORE — “Eyore In Distress”
Poor Eyore can’t catch a break — and, neither can the prosecutors, private attorneys, and individuals subjected to Garland’s botched “management” of EOIR — “America’s Worst Courts!”

WENDY YOUNG @ KIND ON SAN ANTONIO TRAGEDY

Dear Paul –

The entire team at Kids In Need of Defense is devastated by the news that at least 46 people were found dead in an abandoned tractor-trailer in Texas and more than a dozen others in the truck, including children, were taken to local hospitals for treatment. While we wait for more details to emerge, we wanted to share the following statement from our President, Wendy Young.

“As rising violence, natural disasters, and other threats force migrants to make impossible choices in their quest to find safety, our nation’s response cannot be to place families and children in further harm by indefinitely closing our borders to people seeking protection and ignoring the dangers they face in their home countries. This most recent tragedy and the disturbing rise in migrant deaths globally underscore the need to create safer pathways to protection for refugees. The Biden Administration should see this heartbreaking tragedy for what it is, a clarion call to abandon deeply flawed and dangerous immigration policies. It must reinstate humane and orderly processing, including reopening official ports of entry, hiring child welfare experts to care for and screen children, and provide fair adjudication of protection claims. It is time for the United States to regain its footing as a leader in the protection of migrant families and children.”

– The KIND Team

****************

The key part of Wendy’s statement: “including reopening official ports of entry, hiring child welfare experts to care for and screen children, and provide fair adjudication of protection claims.”

Denial rates for recent arrivals who manage to get hearings (see, e.g., Garland’s bogus “dedicated dockets,” — actually “dedicated to denial” and nothing else), many of them children and unrepresented, hover around 100%. They are “guided” by a “largely holdover,” anti-asylum BIA that lacks true asylum expertise and issues no positive precedents instructing judges on how to consistently and legally grant asylum. Consequently, there is no “fair adjudication” of asylum claims. That feeds the toxic nativist myth that nobody at the Southern Border is a “legitimate” asylum seeker.

Unless and until Garland tosses the unqualified jurists at EOIR and replaces them with experts committed to due process, fundamental fairness, and correct, generous, practical precedents and proper applications of asylum law, the system will remain in failure. It’s a monumental mistake by the Biden Administration not to fix that which they absolutely control — starting with the Immigration Courts at EOIR.

Refugees will continue to die at the hands of smugglers who were given control of our immigration system by the Trump Administration and remain empowered by Garland’s & Mayorkas’s poor performance combined with biased, White Nationalist, Federal Judges appointed by Trump at all levels of our failing justice system!

Today’s WashPost editorial described how far-right nativists have basically turned our immigration system over to smugglers:

The absence of any workable legal system that would admit migrants systematically, in numbers that would meet the U.S. labor market’s demand, is the original sin of the chaos at the border. That is Congress’s bipartisan failure, a symptom of systemic paralysis for many years. More recently, a public health rule has had the effect of incentivizing unauthorized migrants to make multiple attempts to cross the border. The rule, imposed by the Trump administration, retained for more than a year by the Biden administration, and now frozen in place by Republican judges, allows border authorities to swiftly expel migrants, but with no asylum hearings or criminal consequences for repeated attempts to cross the border. That has been a boon to migrant smuggling networks.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/29/san-antonio-migrants-deaths-solutions/

I take issue with the term “bipartisan failure” in the legislative context. It’s true that the Dems inexplicably squandered a golden chance to fix many immigration problems when they had 60 votes in the Senate in Obama’s first two years. But, before and after that time, the failure to achieve realistic, humane, robust legal immigration reform legislation has been on the nativist right of the GOP that now dominates the party. Pretending otherwise is useless and dishonest.

Democrats have made numerous reasonable legislative proposals to bring Dreamers and other long-term productive residents of America out of the underground and into the legal mainstream of our society. Additionally, Veteran Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) has introduced the Refugee Protection Act. https://immigrationcourtside.com/2019/11/24/professor-karen-musalo-la-times-we-can-restore-legality-humanity-to-u-s-asylum-law-thats-why-the-refugee-protection-act-deserves-everyones-support/ Also, Chairman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) has sponsored the “Real Courts Rule of Law Act of 2022.” https://immigrationcourtside.com/2022/05/16/%e2%9a%96%ef%b8%8fimmigration-courts-article-i-bill-passes-out-of-house-judiciary-on-party-line-vote/.

All of these proposals would have made long-overdue, common sense reforms to eliminate hopeless backlogs, benefit our economy, strengthen our legal system, and facilitate better allocation of Government resources. Yet, there has been scant GOP interest in improving the system. The GOP appears to believe that promoting a dysfunctional immigration system, denying human rights, and guaranteeing a large “extralegal population” available as scapegoats and exploitable labor best serves their parochial political interests.

And, speaking of useless and dishonest, here’s Leon Krausze, WashPost Global Opinions Contributor, on how the disingenuous performance of Texas Governor Greg Abbott and Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has helped fuel both resurgent Mexican migration and unnecessary deaths at or near the border. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/29/san-antonio-migrant-deaths-trailer-mexico-amlo/.

The “good guys” — those committed to due process, fundamental fairness, individual rights, equal justice, scholarship, and human dignity — need to fight back at every level of our political and judicial systems — while they still exist! Because if the GOP has its way, that won’t be for long!🏴‍☠️

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

06-30-22

IT’S HELL TO BE A REFUGEE! 😭— But, It Still Pays To Be White! — Racism Dominates US Border Policy As Ukrainians Welcomed, Black & Brown Refugees, Not So Much!🤮 — “Racial Justice” Takes a L.O.A. At Mayorkas’s DHS & Garland’s DOJ!

Haitians at the Border — U.S. Border Patrol Haiti
By Bart van Leeuwan
“Haitians and other refugees of color probably wish they could pass for White Ukrainians!”
Republished by license

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/04/02/with-no-direct-pathways-united-states-hundreds-ukrainian-refugees-are-gathering-us-mexico-border/

Kevin Sieff reports for WashPost:

. . . .

Tijuana was often indifferent to the iterations of migrants and refugees who arrived here. But the support for Ukrainians was immediate.

“We will work together so you can achieve your dream,” said the city’s mayor, Montserrat Caballero, when she visited the encampment on Thursday. “Welcome to Tijuana.”

On Friday evening, one woman serenaded the refugees while strumming an acoustic guitar. An inebriated American man handed hundreds of dollars in cash to a Ukrainian American volunteer, cursing out Russian President Vladimir Putin as he distributed the money.

“I love Ukrainians,” he slurred.

No. 319 was 21-year-old Svyastoslav Urusky, from Lviv, whose grandparents lived in Sacramento and were waiting for him on the other side of the border crossing.

Like many of the Ukrainians in Tijuana, Urusky had visited U.S. embassies and consulates in European capitals after leaving Ukraine, inquiring about a path to refugee status in the United States.

“They told us, ‘Sorry, we don’t have any options for you yet,’ ” Urusky recounted an embassy official in Poland saying.

So he and his family, after reading the guidance on a Telegram channel, booked flights to Mexico. At 1 p.m. on Friday afternoon, his number was called.

. . . .

At the Tijuana border crossing, U.S. officials have given orders that only Ukrainians can be put on the list. A policy known as Title 42, due to be lifted in May, has prevented asylum seekers from crossing the border to make their claims since the beginning of the pandemic. It has been used in about 1.7 million migrant expulsions over the past two years.

On Friday, a family of Honduran asylum seekers, turned away at the border, passed by the Ukrainian encampment to ask for small change.

U.S. officials have carved out an exemption to Title 42 for Ukrainians. But many Russians are fleeing simultaneously, including some with Ukrainian relatives. No. 939 was a Ukrainian woman whose 18-year-old son had a Russian passport.

“Will they let us across?” she asked a volunteer. No one could answer.

. . . .

*****************

Read the complete story at the link.

I’m in favor of fair, humane, generous, and dignified treatment of all refugees and asylum seekers! That’s actually what our laws and international treaties to which we are party require.

Sadly, under Trump, the U.S. Government, aided to a large extent by feckless and often right-leaning Federal Courts, simply “normalized” racism-driven violations of legal and human rights. So far has our political system and the rule of law deteriorated that the Biden Administration, and even some Dem pols (e.g., Joe Manchin, Henry Cuellar), speak of illegal racist treatment of refugees and migrants as “options” and “strategies” rather than legal and moral perversions.

According to these folks, we should check the polls, keep an eye on the midterms, and heed the chatter on Sunday talk shows before deciding whether it’s “good policy” to treat persons of color as human beings entitled to seek legal protection or whether to keep knowingly and intentionally violating the law by treating their lives as expendable because it might “play better” at the polls. (It actually won’t).

Perhaps the “low point” of the recent discussion of the long-overdue, still well in the future, elimination of the “illegal Title 42 ruse” came on Meet the Press with Chuck Todd. There, Chuck quipped that an anonymous Biden Administration source had said something to the effect of: “It’s a long time till May 23, perhaps we’ll have a ‘new strain’ of COVID by then.”

In other words, perhaps not surprisingly given their scofflaw, racist, demeaning, and dehumanizing actions at the border to date, some within the Biden Administration are secretly (or not so secretly) “hoping” for another “fake emergency.” That will allow them to continue to violate the legal and human rights of Haitians, Latin Americans, and other persons of color while offering preferential treatment to their White Brothers & Sisters (“folks just like us”) fleeing Ukraine!

Once you violate our law 1.7 million times, with deadly, disastrous human consequences, it’s hard to stop! It’s also hard to talk credibly about “equal justice” and the “rule of law” when your actions repeatedly are contrary to both. That’s a problem that the Biden Administration, and particularly Garland and his complicit group at DOJ, have yet to come to grips with!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

04-04-22

FINALLY, LEADING DEMS IN CONGRESS DEMAND END TO BIDEN’S TITLE 42 CHARADE! — NDPA All-Star 🌟🦸🏻‍♀️ Blaine Bookey Speaks Out For Ukrainians & Other Legal Asylum Seekers Being Abused 🤮 By Biden Administration @ The Southern Border!

MarIa Sacchetti reports for WashPost:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/03/10/title42-border-asylum-democrats-trump/

Leading Senate Democrats demanded that the Biden administration immediately end a Trump-era policy that blocks asylum-seeking migrants from crossing land borders into the United States, after lawyers said U.S. Customs and Border Protection expelled a single mother of three who had traveled from Ukraine to Mexico seeking refuge.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) cited the “desperate” Ukrainian family at a news conference Thursday and said he was deeply disappointed that the Biden administration has dragged out the Trump-era policy, which a federal appeals court in D.C. last week called “questionable.” The Trump administration issued the order two years ago under Title 42, which is the public health code. Since then, officials have expelled more than 1.6 million migrants to countries such as Haiti and Mexico.

“The United States is supposed to welcome refugees with open arms, not put them in additional danger by denying them a chance to plead their case and leaving them at the mercy of criminals and smugglers,” Schumer said, joined by advocates for immigrants. “Now’s the time to stop the madness.”

Courts issue new directives to Biden on border expulsions

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, added that the policy “has created life-threatening conditions” for migrants. He called on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which issued the order under President Donald Trump and has extended it under President Biden, to rescind it.

. . . .

Sofiia, 34, who asked to be identified only by her first name because she has family sheltering in their basements in Ukraine, said in a telephone interview that her family had enjoyed a good life there. She worked as a Hebrew teacher and lived in her father’s house. They left as bombs grew closer.

“I was seriously afraid for my life and the life of my kids,” she said in English, one of four languages that she speaks.

She said she and her children — ages 6, 12 and 14 — flung suitcases stuffed with clothes and medicines into her old Citroen and drove straight to Moldova, the closest border, and then into Romania, where they traveled to Germany and caught a flight to Mexico. She said that they tried to enter legally twice, once by car and again by foot, and that officials rejected them both times, citing the Title 42 order.

“I was surprised that they don’t even want to listen,” she said. “I was trying to tell them that I have tests and I am vaccinated but they told me, ‘No, no, no, no, no.’”

She said she does not speak Spanish and was crying on the bridge in Mexico when lawyer Blaine Bookey spotted her. Bookey, the legal director of the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at the University of California’s Hastings law school, was there with her students to aid Haitian migrants facing similar troubles.

ADVERTISEMENT

00:00

Bookey said Customs and Border Protection told her that they would consider admitting the Ukrainian family. They were planning to try again Thursday, she said, adding that shelters in Mexico are filled with other would-be refugees who are not eligible to enter.

“There’s families like this that are showing up at the border from all sorts of countries from similar levels of violence. They deserve process to apply for asylum,” Bookey said. “This case really brings it home for people how just problematic this policy is.”

*********************

Read Maria’s full article at the link.

Rhetoric over action!

“Do as I say, not as I do!”

More cowardly performances from AG Garland and SG Prelogar who continue to “defend the indefensible,” putting politics over their constitutional duty to speak up for due process, human rights, racial justice, adherence to international conventions, and the rule of law.

The “COVID emergency” appears to be “over” everywhere in the U.S., even in areas with significant infection rates, EXCEPT for asylum seekers at the Southern Border who never were a major threat anyway.

“Saying no” to desperate Ukrainian mothers and children seeking refuge in the U.S. That’s ”law enforcement?” That’s how your tax dollars are being spent? Do these count as “border apprehensions?”

The Dem leaders are right to speak out. But, they waited far too long to do so. This travesty has been going on since Day 1 of the Biden Administration.

The only “hero” 🌟 here is Blaine Bookey and others like her who have the guts and courage to stand up for equal justice for all when politicos, judges, and public officials “tank!”

Meanwhile, although the opposition to Biden’s scofflaw policy hasn’t restored the rule of law for most asylum seekers, it might have generated at least a modest reaction. CBS News reports that the CDC has revoked the (bogus) Title 42 authority to bar the entry of unaccompanied children seeking asylum. News: https://apple.news/Anfp9S-UAQFqT5PWRc-8u2A

This appears to be a response to the attack on this group of vulnerable children by Trump-appointed righty anti-immigrant zealot U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman and his motley gang of GOP state AGs. See, e.g., https://immigrationcourtside.com/2022/03/05/%f0%9f%a4%aftitle-42-madness-even-as-dc-circuit-bars-returns-to-persecution-or-torture-trump-federal-judge-in-texas-abuses-children%f0%9f%a4%ae%e2%98%a0%ef%b8%8f-circuit-findings-of-ill/

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

03-12-22

😎👍🏼⚖️🗽 MORE FREE NDPA TRAINING FROM THE EXPERTS: 6 Months After the Fall of Aghanistan: Free Webinar Mar. 9 1-2 pm ET!

Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr
Cornell Law

Cornell Law School and the Cornell Migrations Initiative, along with other organizations, are hosting a free public webinar on Wednesday March 9 from 1-2 pm ET entitled “After the Fall: The Future of Afghan Allies Fleeing the Taliban.”

Six months after the fall of Afghanistan, a lot has been done, but a lot remains to be done.The United States evacuated over 100,000 Afghans to the United States or third countries.Yet an estimated 200,000 Afghans who helped the U.S. military or government remain in Afghanistan, fearing persecution and famine.Moreover, those who have made it to the United States have mostly entered on humanitarian parole, which is a temporary status that expires after two years.They need ways to remain in the United States permanently.

Learn what Cornell University and other organizations have done to assist Afghans at risk, what remains to be done, and how you can help.

Speakers include Joel Kelsey, chief of staff to U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal; Chis Purdy, director of Veterans for American Ideals and Outreach at Human Rights First; Nell Cady-Kruse from the Evacuate Our Allies Coalition; Camille Mackler, executive director of Immigrant ARC; and Katie Rahmlow, a Cornell law student who has worked on several Afghan cases. Cornell law professor Stephen Yale-Loehr, who directs an Afghanistan asylum clinic at Cornell Law School, will moderate.

To register for the free webinar, go to https://ecornell.cornell.edu/keynotes/overview/K030922a/

Stephen Yale-Loehr

Professor of Immigration Law Practice, Cornell Law School

Faculty Director, Immigration Law and Policy Program

Faculty Fellow, Migrations Initiative

Co-director, Asylum Appeals Clinic

Co-Author, Immigration Law & Procedure Treatise

Of Counsel, Miller Mayer

Phone: 607-379-9707

e-mail: SWY1@cornell.edu

Twitter: @syaleloehr

***********************

Thanks so much Steve for passing this along! An all-star lineup to be sure! 🌟🌟🌟 Don’t miss it! Required registration available at the above link.

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-24-22

Arelis R. Hernandez reports for WashPost:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Many groups issued immediate statements of outrage and protest at this cruel, lawless, and intellectually dishonest betrayal! I set forth two of them here:

From the American Immigration Council:

From the Lutheran Immigration & Refugee Services:

Zak was interviewed by Melissa Del Bosque of The Border Chronicle:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Here’s the link for more information about this innovative program:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Randy Billings reports for Portland Press Herald:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Here are some relevant portions of Judge Sullivan’s opinion in Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, D.D.C., Nov. 22, 2022, to keep in mind as the bogus claims and misleading reporting continue to mushroom ahead of the Dec. 22 (Wednesday) date for re-establishing the rule of law @ our Southern Border:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🗽DISSENTING OPINION: TRADING AWAY REFUGEE RIGHTS & DUE PROCESS FOR LONG OVERDUE DREAMER PROTECTIONS IS “NOT OK!”

By Paul Wickham Schmidt

Courtside Exclusive

Dec. 6, 2022

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

From Michael Shear & Eileen Sullivan the NY Times:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever! Tyranny & Stupidity From either Dems or the GOP, never!

Related posts:

Hannah Knowles and Liz Goodwin report for WashPost:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

My colleague Sue writes:

Here’s the joint letter letter from AILA & ICE:

Here’s the text of a letter to Director Neal from the NJ State Bar:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Kevin Sieff reports for WashPost:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

MarIa Sacchetti reports for WashPost:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts: