☠️🤮🦹🏿‍♂️ CHILD ABUSERS IN ROBES! —- Three Trump Appointees On DC Circuit OK Child Abuse @ Border!

Trump Dumping Asylum Seekers in Hondiras
Dumping Asylum Seekers in Honduras
Artist: Monte Wolverton
Reproduced under license
“Floaters”
“Floaters — How The World’s Richest Country Responds To Asylum Seekers”
EDS NOTE: GRAPHIC CONTENT – The bodies of Salvadoran migrant Oscar Alberto Mart??nez Ram??rez and his nearly 2-year-old daughter Valeria lie on the bank of the Rio Grande in Matamoros, Mexico, Monday, June 24, 2019, after they drowned trying to cross the river to Brownsville, Texas. Martinez’ wife, Tania told Mexican authorities she watched her husband and child disappear in the strong current. (AP Photo/Julia Le Duc)

Here’s the opinion, with no discernible rationale for this unprincipled and irrational action:

DC CIRCUIT APPROVES CHILD ABUSE

 

Here’s the “death to children” ☠️⚰️ panel: Katsas, Rao, and Walker, Circuit Judges. As long as it’s not THEIR children  . . . . 

Bad things happen to countries that make child abuse an “official policy” and reward child abusers with lifetime judicial appointments!

The Biden Administration needs to move quickly to get a handle on what’s happening in their name at the border. Also, might want to take a look at the Government lawyers who defend the indefensible in Federal Court.

Better Judges For a Better America! No more child abusers on the Federal Bench!

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever! Child Abusing Circuit Judges🤮, Never!

 

PWS

01-30-21

 

⚖️🗽🧑🏽‍⚖️”MEDLEY OF INJUSTICE” — CIRCUITS CONTINUE TO LOWER HAMMER 🔨 ON BIA: Anti-Asylum Misogyny; Illegal & Incredibly Stupid “Policies;” “Perplexing” Lack Of Legal Knowledge Highlighted In Latest Batch Of Reversals! — “Attempted rape by a gang of men, in broad daylight on a public street, is especially terrorizing because it powerfully demonstrates the perpetrator’s domination, control over the victim and imperviousness to the law. Requiring evidence of additional harms both minimizes the gravity of the sexual assault and demeans the victim.”

Dan Kowalski
Dan Kowalski
Online Editor of the LexisNexis Immigration Law Community (ILC)

Dan Kowalski reports from LexisNexis Immigration Community:

9th Thwarts Anti-Asylum Misogyny For Gang-Rape Victim:

Woman Tortured
“She struggled madly in the torturing Ray”
Amazing StoriesArtist Unknown, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca9-on-asylum-india-persecution-kaur-v-wilkinson

CA9 on Asylum, India, Persecution: Kaur v. Wilkinson

Kaur v. Wilkinson

“The BIA erred in imposing evidentiary requirements of ongoing injury or treatment beyond the sexual assault itself in order to show persecution. Kaur’s credible testimony about the attempted gang rape is sufficient to show persecution. Attempted rape by a gang of men, in broad daylight on a public street, is especially terrorizing because it powerfully demonstrates the perpetrator’s domination, control over the victim and imperviousness to the law. Requiring evidence of additional harms both minimizes the gravity of the sexual assault and demeans the victim. We grant Kaur’s petition for review and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

[Hats off to Douglas Jalaie!]

1st Calls Out Violation Of Regs, Incredibly Stupid Denial Of Reopening For Approved U Visa Petition Beneficiary Waiting For “Number:”

EYORE
“Eyore In Distress”
Once A Symbol of Fairness, Due Process, & Best Practices, Now Gone “Belly Up”

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca1-on-u-visa-waitlist-granados-benitez-v-wilkinson

CA1 on U Visa Waitlist: Granados Benitez v. Wilkinson

Granados Benitez v. Wilkinson

“Petitioner Carlos Antonio Granados Benitez seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA” or “Board”) denial of his motion to reopen his removal proceedings and to remand to the immigration judge (“IJ”) for further consideration in light of the fact that he had been placed on a waiting list by United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) for a U-1 nonimmigrant visa (“U visa”) pursuant to the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (“VTVPA”), Pub. L. No. 106-386, § 1513(a)(2)(A), (b), 114 Stat. 1464 (2000) (codified as amended at 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(U)). Because we find that the BIA abused its discretion, in that it failed to render a reasoned decision that accords with its own precedent and policies, and it further failed to consider the position of its sister agency Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), we grant the petition. In so holding we join the views of the Seventh Circuit in Guerra Rocha v. Barr, 951 F.3d 848, 852- 54 (7th Cir. 2020).”

[Hats off to Paige Austin, with whom Philip L. Torrey, Make the Road New York, and the Harvard Law School Crimmigration Clinic were on brief, for petitioner, and Brian D. Straw, Gregory E. Ostfeld, and Greenberg Traurig, LLP on brief for ASISTA Immigration Assistance, Asian Pacific Institute on Gender-Based Violence, National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, National Network to End Domestic Violence, Safe Horizon, and Tahirih Justice Center, amici curiae!]

3rd “Perplexed” By BIA’s Ignorance Of “Equitable Tolling,” Own Authority:

Kangaroos
“Hey, guys, ever hear of something called “equitable tolling?”  “Nah, is it spelled D-E-N-I-E-D?” “Equitable TROLLING,” I’ve heard of that?”https://www.flickr.com/photos/rasputin243/
Creative Commons License

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca3-on-equitable-tolling-nkomo-v-atty-gen

CA3 on Equitable Tolling: Nkomo v. Atty. Gen.

Nkomo v. Atty. Gen.

“Because Nkomo properly raised equitable tolling before the BIA, the BIA erred in failing to consider her request for equitable tolling on the merits. We remand for the Board to do so in the first instance.”

“The BIA’s suggestion that it does not have the authority to make decisions on equitable grounds is perplexing. The BIA has authority to equitably toll the deadline for motions to reopen the precise relief Nkomo sought.”

[Hats off to Jerard A. Gonzalez!]

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

Demeaning rape victims! ☠️🤮👎🏻 So, what else is new @ EOIR? “Gonzo” Sessions 🦹🏿‍♂️ set the tone for anti-asylum, racially motivated misogyny in Matter of A-B- and “his judges” have taken it from there! (I repeat my oft-made observation: What kind of “due process” system lets a characters like Sessions, Whitaker, and Barr “own” judges?  How would you like to be a woman on trial for her life before a “judge” selected, directed, and “owned” by the likes of  these men with clear records of “applied contempt” for equal justice? Sessions, Whitaker, Barr, & Jeffrey Rosen are gone — but their legacy of bias and injustice lives on @ EOIR!)

One of my esteemed Round Table 🛡⚔️ colleagues summed up the latest set of outrageous miscarriages of justice from Falls Church:

All of these decisions demonstrate the degree of careful and detailed analysis that these cases require.And yet the BIA couldn’t keep staff attorneys after McHenry capped them at GS-13 (entry level), and keeps increasing the monthly quotas for BIA staff attorneys.Plus of course the Board Members themselves are now all these types who only review the decisions to make sure they end in the word “dismissed.”

If you were trying to create a recipe for disaster, you couldn’t have planned it better.

I heard the latter comment twice yesterday from immigration/human rights/due process experts on opposite sides of our country who observe and participate in the system at various levels.

To quote Justice Sotomayor’s recent dissent: “This is not justice.”

Historical Footnote:  One of my first actions as BIA Chair in 1995 was to establish a “GS-15 Career Ladder” for all Attorney Advisors at the BIA. This made the BIA competitive with the rest of the DOJ. 

It allowed us to attract and retain not only “top talent” coming from the “DOJ Honors Program” (how I got my first job at the BIA in 1973), but also outstanding career attorneys who wanted an opportunity to do research, writing, and “applied scholarship” that made a difference in individuals’ lives. Indeed, at various times the BIA has had on its staff former Senior Executives seeking a “change of  focus” to a career that allowed them to do the things they liked best about the law.

One of them was a former SES colleague at the “Legacy INS” who found in transferring to a GS-15 BIA Attorney Advisor position a career satisfaction, fulfillment, and sense of meaningful contribution that person had been missing in INS management at that time.

Reducing the top grade for Attorney Advisors is not only professionally and personally demeaning, it also marks the entire organization as “second class” and shows just how stupid and incompetent (and, in recent history, overpaid) EOIR “management” has become! And, as pointed out in my colleague’s comments above, it has not only adversely affected careers but the human lives in the balance on the BIA’s docket.

As I understood my “mission” from then Attorney General Janet Reno in 1995, the BIA was supposed to be about “attracting the best and the brightest judges and supporting them with the best and brightest staff.” Essentially getting it to function like the “12th Circuit” was a description mentioned during my interview process for the Chair job. 

Sadly, now, it has become an assembly line of expediency, injustice, shoddy legal work, mindless “corner cutting,” unprofessional behavior, and human misery.

To repeat my colleague’s comment: “If you were trying to create a recipe for disaster, you couldn’t have planned it better.”

All of these cases should have been resolved in the foreign national’s favor without ever getting to the Courts of Appeals! Bad judging, grossly incompetent administration, and lack of qualified, dynamic, judicial leadership from respected “practical scholars” costs lives, produces unacceptable and unfair inconsistencies, and clogs the Article III Courts with unnecessary litigation.

Indeed, the First Circuit’s decision in Granados basically reveals OIL’s “smorgasbord” of bogus arguments to uphold the BIA’s incorrect decision as “without merit” — actually frivolous! There are deep problems @ DOJ resulting from the ongoing corruption and disregard for ethics and professional leadership from the now-departed kakistocracy! They go far beyond the mess at EOIR!

Sure hope that Judge Garland, Vanita Gupta, and their incoming team @ DOJ have a comprehensive plan for replacing the BIA and reforming EOIR! The human beings suffering in this disgracefully inept and abusive “court system” and their courageous, long suffering attorneys are counting on you! Think of it this way: What if YOUR daughter were the rape victim demeaned, dehumanized, and denied justice by EOIR?

🇺🇸⚖️🗽👍🏼👨🏻‍⚖️🧑🏽‍⚖️Due Process Forever!

PWS

01-30-21

🇺🇸⚖️🗽TELLING IT LIKE IT IS! — Calling Out The White Nationalist Kakistocracy @ EOIR!

EYORE
“Eyore In Distress”
Once A Symbol of Fairness, Due Process, & Best Practices, Now Gone “Belly Up”
Star Chamber Justice
“Justice”
Star Chamber
Style
Woman Tortured
“She struggled madly in the torturing Ray”
Amazing StoriesArtist Unknown, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Kangaroos
BIA Members Unwind After Harassing Another Expert, Overruling Circuit Court, & Aiding Their “Partners” At ICE In Demeaning Justice
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rasputin243/
Creative Commons License
Four Horsemen
BIA Asylum Panel In Action
Albrecht Dürer, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

‘White Nationalism’ In Immigration Courts Must Go: Ex-Judge
By Jennifer Doherty
Law360 (January 28, 2021, 9:48 PM EST) — A former immigration judge called on the Biden administration to reorient the mission of immigration courts on Thursday, saying that a “white nationalist program” had taken root under the Trump administration and needs to be eradicated.
Speaking on a panel about a new report showing that the vast majority of non-detained migrants appear at their immigration court hearings, retired Judge Paul Wickham Schmidt called out Trump administration officials over “big lies and bogus narratives” promoted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Executive Office of Immigration Review, including claims that detention was necessary to prevent migrants from disappearing.
Judge Schmidt, who used to be the chair of the Board of Immigration Appeals, pointed to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ intervention in immigration cases to relitigate cases such as whether women who suffer domestic abuse in regions with high rates of femicide qualify for asylum, as well as the former administration’s messaging to immigration judges that their role was an extension of DHS’ enforcement mechanism.
“It’s all been part, I think, of the Stephen Miller white nationalist program, that there is no such thing as a good immigrant; all the immigrants are here to take our jobs or to evade the system,” Judge Schmidt said, referring to one of former President Donald Trump’s senior advisers.
Meanwhile, Thursday’s report from the American Immigration Council, an advocacy nonprofit group, confirmed what many immigration judges have known for years, according to Judge Schmidt.
Relying on a sample of 2.8 million immigration court cases where migrants were either released or were never detained, the report found that 83% of respondents with pending or completed removal cases showed up for every hearing, a share that increased to 96% for immigrants represented by counsel.
“Represented asylum-seekers appearing before fair, knowledgeable judges show up for virtually all of their EOIR merits hearings,” Judge Schmidt said.
Based on those findings, the report recommended four policy reforms, including reducing immigration detention and ending the Migrant Protection Protocols, which have forced over 70,000 people to wait in Mexico for decisions in their asylum cases.
The report also called for additional training for immigration judges and the rollback of a law requiring judges to issue orders of removal for migrants who failed to appear, an occurrence the authors found was frequently due to faulty notices to appear.
Creating an Article I, also called a legislative court, would also give immigration judges more independence in their review of individual cases and relieve them from pressure to meet case quotas, according to the report.
UCLA School of Law professor Ingrid Eagly, co-author of the report, said that additional training would serve to reduce inconsistencies between immigration courts and ensure that judges held the
government accountable for its responsibility to notify migrants of their court dates.

. . . .

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

Those with access can read the rest of Jennifer’s article on Law360.

Jennifer Doherty
Jennifer Doherty
Reporter
Law 360
Photo: Twitter

I was talking to a lawyer/reporter this afternoon. Her comment was: “Could anybody have designed a worse system for deciding life or death cases?” She was told in “pro bono training” to observe how certain judges like the chairs arranged in the courtroom because it could affect the outcome of her client’s asylum case!

Another attorney I spoke with who had practiced personal injury law couldn’t believe that no immigration cases ever “settled.” Even those with clear merit bounce around the system for years and then go to full hearings, sometimes with inconsistent results!

How can a system operate like this? It can’t! That’s why doubling the number of questionably qualified “judges” has resulted in at least doubling, perhaps tripling, the “backlog.”

Under pressure from White Nationalists like Miller, Sessions, Hamilton, and Barr, EOIR has generated an artificially created “backlog” consisting largely of : 1] cases that could have easily been granted in a fair, functional, practical system; 2) cases that could be granted or placed in line at USCIS (another broken and dysfunctional agency); and 3) cases that never should have been filed in a rational system!

An incompetent BIA has failed to set forth the precedents for granting asylum and other relief that are necessary to restore the rule of law and common sense to a broken system! And they have totally failed to hold biased anti-asylum and nativist-enabling judges accountable! That’s because the BIA itself has become an organ of White Nationalist restrictionist bias bearing little, if any, resemblance to a “court” within the common understanding of the term. “Judicial independence,” impartiality, expertise, due process, and rationality have become “bad jokes” at EOIR!

And, for the past four years, the folks “running” this godawful system haven’t set foot in a courtroom in years (if ever) and don’t have a clue about asylum law or representing humans (rather than “agencies” or “nativists” as clients). It’s a friggin’ inexcusable disaster. FUBAR+++++++!

Judge Garland must end it!

🇺🇸⚖️🗽🧑🏽‍⚖️👨🏻‍⚖️👍🏼Due Process Forever!

PWS

 

⚖️🗽OUTING THE BIG NATIVIST LIE: EOIR/DHS CLAIM THAT MIGRANTS DON’T SHOW UP FOR HEARINGS REFUTED BY USG’S OWN DATA — Professor Ingrid Eagly & Steven Schafer Analyzed Millions Of Records To Show How False Narratives Drive Draconian Policies — Eagley, Shafer, Reichlin-Melnick, Schmidt Set Record Straight @ Press Conference!

Professor Ingrid Eagly
Professor Ingrid Eagly
UCLA Law
PHOTO: Twitter
Steven Shafer ESQUIRE
Steven Shafter, Esquire
Managing Attorney
Esperanza Immigrant Rights Project
Los Angeles, CA
Photo: Esperanza website

 

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick
Policy Counsel
American Immigration Council
Photo: Twitter
Me
Me
  • PRESS RELEASE

11 Years of Government Data Reveal That Immigrants Do Show Up for Court

AddThis Sharing Buttons

Share to Facebook

Share to Twitter

Share to Print

Share to Email

Share to More

January 28, 2021

WASHINGTON—A new report released today by the American Immigration Council examines 11 years of government data on the rate at which immigrants appear for hearings in U.S. immigration court. The report, “Measuring In Absentia Removal in Immigration Court,” concludes that an overwhelming 83% of immigrants attend their immigration court hearings, and those who fail to appear in court often did not receive notice or faced hardship in getting to court.

As the new administration of President Joe Biden considers how to reform the immigration system, including the immigration courts, this report reveals how reliance on detention, access to legal representation, and immigration judges’ docket management impact immigrants’ appearance rate.

The report draws on government data from 2,797,437 immigration court removal proceedings held between 2008 to 2018. It documents how individuals who were never detained and those who were released from detention proceeded through court and what obstacles they faced in pursuing their immigration cases.

The report finds that people released from immigration detention and individuals with attorneys overwhelmingly attend their hearings. Data also show that immigration judges have a vital role in maintaining due process. The findings further demonstrate that the creation of an independent structure for the immigration courts would help reduce the prevalence of unwarranted in absentia removal orders and give immigration judges more discretion in managing their dockets and individual case decisions.

The main findings of the report include:

  • 83% of nondetained immigrants with completed or pending removal cases attended all of their hearings.
  • 96% of nondetained immigrants represented by a lawyer attended all of their hearings.
  • 15% of those who were ordered deported because they did not appear in court successfully reopened their cases and had their removal orders rescinded. In some years, as many as 20% of all orders of removal for missing court were later overturned.
  • Individuals who apply for relief from removal have especially high rates of appearance.
  • Appearance rates vary strongly based on the immigration court’s location.
  • The Executive Office for Immigration Review’s method for measuring the rate at which immigrants fail to appear in court presents a limited picture of the frequency of missed court appearances.

“The empirical research presented in this report debunks the myth that immigrants don’t show up for court,” said Ingrid Eagly, professor of Law at UCLA School of Law. “Relying on the government’s own immigration court data, co-author Steven Shafer and I find that, since 2008, 83% of all immigrants in nondetained deportation cases have attended all of their court hearings. In addition, over the 11 years of our study, 96% individuals represented by an attorney attended all of their court hearings.”

“Today’s report verifies what those who have worked in the immigration court system already knew: immigrants overwhelmingly show up in court. We hope that this data finally puts to rest a false narrative about immigrants’ appearance rates that past administrations used to justify restrictive and cruel immigration policies,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy counsel at the American Immigration Council. “After previous administrations spent years funding immigration enforcement to address a small set of individuals who miss court, the Biden administration has the opportunity change course. To ensure even higher appearance rates, the new administration should focus on updating immigration court technology, providing better resources to orient immigrants, and working to ensure that all immigrants navigating our removal system are represented by counsel. As Congress debates immigration reform, this report shows that it’s time to revisit harsh and punitive laws that require judges to enter deportation orders for a single missed hearing and which limit the ability of the government to appoint counsel.”

“The findings of this timely report confirm what many of us formerly on the immigration bench have known for years: represented asylum seekers appearing before fair, knowledgeable judges show up for virtually all of their immigration court hearings,” said Paul Wickham Schmidt, former immigration judge and board member for the Board of Immigration Appeals. “The findings refute one of the many ‘big lies’ and ‘bogus narratives’ promoted by the last administration to demean and dehumanize asylum seekers and wrongfully deprive them of their legal and constitutional rights. The Biden administration should pursue changes that would provide immigration judges greater independence and discretion and support the creation of an independent structure for the immigration courts.”

 

###

For more information, contact:

Maria Frausto at the American Immigration Council, mfrausto@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7526.

MEDIA CONTACT

Maria Frausto, Senior Communications Manager

mfrausto@immcouncil.org

STAY UP TO SPEED

Get the latest from the American Immigration Council in your inbox.

MOST READ

  • PUBLICATIONS
    BLOG POSTS

FOLLOW US

Like 100K people like this. Sign Up to see what your friends like.

Follow

60.8K followers

Follow6,499

***********

Ingrid’s and Steven’s full report is available at the above link.

Here’s a printout of my opening remarks:

No Shows — Final

 

Lies promoted by Government officials and turned into cruel, counterproductive, and biased policies cost lives and undermine our system of justice!

A stunning 96% of represented respondents appear for all hearings! The obvious step for the Biden Administration is to “repurpose” resources squandered by the defeated kakistocracy’s cruel, expensive, ineffective “enforcement gimmicks” like detention in the “New American Gulag,” ludicrous Immigration Judge “dashboards,” walls, bogus protocols, and illegal anti-asylum rules and instead invest in public-private partnerships to achieve universal representation. Building on existing programs, it should be possible to get all respondents represented by trained and competent counsel or accredited representatives. 

Notably, Professor Michele Pistone @ Villanova already runs VIISTA, an innovative, first class asylum litigation training program for accredited representatives. Put some Federal grant money into expanding it to meet the need for representation throughout America. These are “obvious steps” ignored by a captive “court system” run by malicious incompetents implementing a White Nationalist agenda.

Professor Michele Pistone
Professor Michele Pistone
Villanova Law

Combined with a restoration of the rule of law at EOIR and rational DHS enforcement priorities, that’s the way to establish manageable Immigration Court dockets compliant with Due Process and fundamental fairness. Create a model court system that will be a source of pride, rather than a national disgrace. 

Of course a legislatively-enacted, independent, professionally administered expert Article I Immigration Court is absolutely necessary. But, due process and fundamental fairness can’t wait! Lives and futures, not to mention our national values, are at stake. Judge Garland must end the dysfunction and start making urgently needed improvements @ EOIR immediately!

Removing (former) Director McHenry — who promoted the kakistocracy’s anti-immigrant myths, bogus statistics, and “worst management practices” — is a great start. But, it’s certainly not the end of the urgent changes that must be made to implement Due Process and professional court administration at EOIR. In particular, the current BIA is a due process, human rights, and asylum expertise “disaster zone!”

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

PWS

1-29-21

⚖️🗽🇺🇸👩🏻‍⚖️BREAKING: GREAT NEWS FOR DUE PROCESS! – McHenry Ousted @ EOIR, Replaced By Highly Competent, Due-Process-Oriented Professional Judicial Administrator Jean King (Acting) – McHenry Led Miller/Hamilton “Weaponization” Of EOIR, Interference With Judicial Independence, Anti-Asylum White Nationalist Agenda, War On NAIJ & Lawyers, Creation Of 21st “Century Star Chambers” — Gross Mismanagement Helped Artificially “Jack Backlog” To Astounding 1.3 Million Cases With Thousands Of Others Likely “Lost in Space” In EOIR Chaos & Dysfunction!

 

 

McHenry informed EOIR employees last Friday that he was returning to his position as an OCAHO Administrative Law Judge. Can’t imagine there were too many tears shed, except within the “inner circle” of the “EOIR kakistocracy.”

 

OCAHO has long been viewed as EOIR’s “Siberia equivalent” and has been used to “exile” other “out of favor” Senior Execs in the past (ironically including King). Given OCAHO’s traditionally rather limited docket, it appears that McHenry’s ability to further damage our justice system and demean humanity will be restricted.

 

Notably, he was appointed Director by former Attorney General and notorious child abuser Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions without any known qualifications to manage one of America’s largest, most important, and totally screwed-up court systems. Over his four-year tenure, he proved to be every bit as unqualified for the job as his embarrassingly-thin resume originally suggested he would be.

He was part of the remarkably unqualified aptly-named “Atlanta Mafia” at EOIR. They degraded justice and humanity in equal portions as part of their nativist crusade to expand the “Atlanta Asylum Free Zone” nationwide. Basically, only the courageous hard work of talented immigration advocates stopped their nefarious program from reaching its objective, although that’s not to minimize in any way the lasting damage they did to our legal system and human lives.

Among McHenry’s many negative achievements was driving already-low EOIR morale and poor working conditions to depths never before seen or imagined. And, that was for his own employees! Imagine what it was like for foreign nationals and their courageous, determined, yet beleaguered attorneys consigned to this “hell on earth” specially designed to chew up lives and degrade humanity as part of as vile “strategy” to use “courts as deterrents” to those with audacity to seek justice in America.

 

Jean King, by contrast, is an experienced public servant known for her commitment to due process, fundamental fairness, sound scholarship, ethical standards (something that has “gone AWOL” at the DOJ over the past four years), and the “lost art of good government” which the Biden-Harris Administration appears committed to re-establishing.

 

Jean served on the on the BIA staff when I was Chair. She advanced in EOIR during the tenure of the late Juan Osuna as BIA Chair and then Director. She reportedly chose “exile to OCAHO” after she refused as General Counsel to “go along get along” with some of McHenry’s more outrageously illegal regulatory/administrative moves. He also retaliated by cutting the authority of the OGC and assigning it instead to his bogus “Office of Policy.” (Talk about “fraud, waste, and abuse” of government resources –- while the Immigration Courts lacked, and still lack, a functioning e-filing system, McHenry found time and resources for shenanigans like this, obscene “Immigration Judge dashboards,” and pursuing “decertification” of the NAIJ which had “blown the whistle” on his “maliciously incompetent” management!)

 

McHenry’s continuing presence as Director following the inauguration and his “in your face audacity” in issuing memos attempting to define “judicial independence” as obedience to the White Nationalist restrictionist agenda he had been implementing rightly drew outrage from all immigration experts who understand the ongoing contempt for due process and abuses of humanity that have somehow become “institutionalized” as “acceptable behavior” at EOIR during the last four years. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/27/biden-replaces-immigration-court-463053

 

 

If nothing else, Jean King should be able to stop the flood of illegal regulations, false and misleading policy memos and bogus “fact sheets,” and further deterioration of due process until “Team Garland” gets its “EOIR Reform Group” in place.

 

All of us who care about American justice and due process should be heartened that somebody on the Biden Team is aware of the due process disaster at EOIR, has taken bold, decisive action, and apparently plans to fix it, sooner rather than later!

 

Here is Jean’s bio from the EOIR website:

 

Jean King
Chief Administrative Law Judge

Jean King was appointed as the chief administrative law judge in June 2019. Immediately prior to assuming her current duties, she served as general counsel of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) beginning in September 2015. Ms. King received a bachelor of arts degree in 1988 from Brown University and a juris doctorate in 1995 from the College of William and Mary. From July 2015 to August 2015, and previously from December 2012 to October 2014, Ms. King served as deputy general counsel, EOIR. From November 2014 to June 2015, she served as acting general counsel, EOIR. From October 2011 to December 2012, she served as a counsel to the director, EOIR. From March 2011 to October 2011, she served as acting director of operations, Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), EOIR. From 2009 to March 2011, Ms. King served as a temporary board member, BIA. From 2006 to 2009, she was a senior legal advisor at the BIA. From 1996 to 2006, she served as an attorney advisor at the BIA. Prior to joining the BIA, Ms. King spent one year as a judicial law clerk with the Superior Court of Connecticut. Ms. King is a member of the Connecticut and New York State bars.

 

 

 

 

Good luck Jean! Please don’t forget the “Old EOIR Vision” that used to at the top of our internal web page– “through teamwork and innovation, be the world’s best tribunals guaranteeing fairness and due process for all.” It’s still the right vision for EOIR and America, and with the right team, in place, it still can be achieved!

 

Due Process Forever!

PWS

 

01-27-21

 

 

 

 

🇺🇸⚖️🗽JUDGE GARLAND NEEDS THE NDPA — NOW! — Ken Paxton Is A “Magamoron” — There Are Lots Of Bad Federal Judges Out There — Nationwide Injunctions Are A Reality For Both The “Good Guys” & The Nativists Out To Destroy Our Nation! — The Administration Needs The Experts, Practical Scholars, & Due Process Litigators On Board To Redesign The Immigration Justice System & Defend It From White Nationalists Like Paxton!

 

Here’s the “initial analysis” of the latest White Nationalist BS from a Trump-appointed Judge:

Colleagues,

 

Some preliminary thoughts on today’s TRO are available on my blog, crimmigration.com, here.

 

César

 

César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández
Professor of Law
University of Denver
crimmigration.com

(he/him/his/el)

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

Thanks, Cesar. Great analysis!

The White Nationalist, racist kakistocracy isn’t going to “go quietly into the night.” Paxton isn’t the brightest bulb out there, but the DOJ doesn’t have the legal talent available and lacks the expertise to defend America from the dangerous gang determined to destroy our nation and keep racism and inequality in force. 

So, the Biden Administration had better get the smart, motivated, courageous folks who have been pounding the kakistocracy in court over the last four years “on the inside” and let them take on the Paxtons of the world while rationalizing the immigration system, implementing due process, and fighting institutionalized racism. This is a job for the pros, not more “Amateur Night at the Bijou.”

⚖️🗽🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

O1-26-21

🌞😎DAWNING OF A NEW ERA — First Gibson Report of The Biden Presidency (01-25-21) Shows Potential For Returning Sanity, Humanity, Focus On Human Rights, Good Government To America While Highlighting Continuing Problems @ EOIR & Deficiencies @ Supremes! — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group! — Judge Garland Must Take Notice & Fix This Outrageous Mess If He Doesn’t Want to Become Part of It! — There Will Be No “Grace Period” For The Continuing Abuses Of Justice @ Justice! — We Have A “Supreme Problem” In Our Failing Justice System!

Elizabeth Gibson
Elizabeth Gibson
Attorney, NY Legal Assistance Group
Publisher of “The Gibson Report”

COVID-19 & Closures

Note: Policies are rapidly changing, so please verify information with the government and colleagues.

 

EOIR Status Overview & EOIR Court Status Map/List: Hearings in non-detained cases at courts without an announced date are postponed through, and including, February 19, 2021. NYC non-detained remains closed for hearings.

 

TOP NEWS

 

AILA: First 100 Days of the Biden Administration: Tracking executive actions and proposals.

 

Biden Took Eight Administrative Actions on Immigration. Here’s What You Need to Know

IAC: Here is a summary of eight immigration-related changes the new administration just implemented:

1. Scaling back Trump’s unchecked immigration enforcement.

2. 100-Day moratorium on most deportations.

3. The end of the Muslim and African travel bans.

4. Protecting people with DACA.

5. Expedited and extended access to green card processing for Liberians.

6. Pausing construction on the border wall.

7. Ending Trump’s unconstitutional census executive order.

8. Suspending new enrollments in the so-called “Migrant Protection Protocols.”

 

Biden EO: Early Calendar of Themed Days

White House: January 29: Immigration

1. Regional Migration/Border Processing EO : Directs creation of strategies to address root causes

of migration from Central America and expand opportunities for legal migration, while taking

steps to restore the U.S. asylum system by rescinding numerous Trump Administration policies

2. Refugee Policy EO (tent.) : Establishes the principles that will guide the Administration’s

implementation of the U.S. Refugee Admission Program (USRAP) and directs a series of actions

to enhance USRAP’s capacity to fairly, efficiently, and security process refugee applications

3. Family Reunification Task Force EO : Creates task force to reunify families separated by the

Trump Administration’s Immigration policies

4. Legal Immigration EO : Directs immediate review of the Public Charge Rule and other actions

to remove barriers and restore trust in the legal immigration system, including improving the

naturalization process

 

Texas sues Biden administration over 100-day deportation ‘pause’

WaPo: Paxton’s lawsuit claims the deportation freeze defies an agreement between Texas and DHS finalized Jan. 8 — less than two weeks before Trump left office — requiring the department to provide 180 days notice before making changes to immigration policy and enforcement practices. See also Bronx man set to be deported despite 100-day moratorium, attorney says (flight canceled following advocacy) .

 

Biden is starting to roll back Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” program

Vox: The Biden administration announced that, starting Thursday, it will no longer enroll asylum seekers newly arriving on the southern border in a Trump-era program that has forced tens of thousands to wait in Mexico for a chance to obtain protection in the United States. The Homeland Security Department urged anyone currently enrolled in the program, known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) or colloquially as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, to “remain where they are, pending further official information from U.S. government officials.”

 

Trump blocks Venezuelans’ deportation in last political gift

AP: With the clock winding down on his term, U.S. President Donald Trump shielded tens of thousands of Venezuelan migrants from deportation Tuesday night, rewarding Venezuelan exiles who have been among his most loyal supporters and who fear losing the same privileged access to the White House during the Biden administration.

 

The U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021: Help for Asylum Seekers, U Visas, Military Aides

ImmProf: There’s a lot to unpack there. First: eliminating one-year deadline for filing asylum claims. Second: increasing “protections for U visa, T visa, and VAWA applicants.” Third: raising the cap on U visas for 10,000 to 30,000. Fourth: expanding protections for foreign nationals assisting U.S. troops. But see GOP Lawmakers Propose Major Immigration Restrictions.

 

Biden wants to remove this controversial word from US laws

CNN: Biden’s proposed bill, if passed, would remove the word “alien” from US immigration laws, replacing it with the term “noncitizen.”

 

Sen. Hawley moves to block swift confirmation for Biden’s homeland security pick

WaPo: Homeland security nominee Alejandro Mayorkas told senators he would carry out President-elect Joe Biden’s immigration overhaul while intensifying efforts to combat domestic extremism, during a hearing Tuesday that highlighted Republican opposition to his confirmation.

 

The State of the Immigration Courts: Trump Leaves Biden 1.3 Million Case Backlog in Immigration Courts

TRAC: While the Trump administration hired many new immigration judges and implemented a range of different strategies aimed in part at reducing the Immigration Court backlog, the backlog grew each month. Some of Trump’s changes in court operations arguably slowed case processing. However, the primary driver of the exploding backlog was not only the lack of immigration judges but the tsunami of new cases filed in court by the Department of Homeland Security.

 

Bad conduct, leering ‘jokes’ — immigration judges stay on bench

SFChron: Interviews with dozens of attorneys across the country and current and former government officials, as well as internal documents obtained by The Chronicle, show the problems have festered for years. The Justice Department has long lacked a strong system for reporting and responding to sexual harassment and misconduct.

 

Vera Statement on Governor Cuomo’s 2021 State of the State Address

Vera: Gov. Cuomo reaffirmed his commitment to funding the Liberty Defense Project, which provides essential legal services for immigrants across New York State. This is excellent news for families facing separation, deportation and other horrors caused by the federal government’s actions.

 

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

 

District Court Halts Most of EOIR Filing Fee Rule from Going into Effect

A district court judge issued a nationwide stay of the effective date of the 12/18/20 EOIR final fee review rule and a preliminary injunction to enjoin most of its implementation. The rule was set to go into effect on 1/19/21. (CLINIC, et al., v. EOIR, et al., 1/18/21) AILA Doc. No. 21011933

 

White House Issues Memo on Regulatory Freeze Pending Review

White House Chief of Staff Ronald A. Klain issued a memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies instituting a regulatory freeze pending review. AILA Doc. No. 21012090

 

DHS and DOJ Delay Effective Date of Final Rule on Pandemic-Related Security Bars to Asylum and Withholding of Removal

Advance copy of a document that will be published in the Federal Register on 1/25/21, delaying the effective date of the final rule “Security Bars and Processing,” which was scheduled to become effective on 1/22/21. The effective date is delayed until 3/21/21. AILA Doc. No. 21012143

 

DHS Acting Secretary Issues Memorandum on Immigration Enforcement Policies

Acting DHS Secretary Pekoske issued a memorandum directing DHS components to conduct a review of immigration enforcement policies, and setting interim policies for civil enforcement during that review. Beginning 1/22/21, DHS will pause removals of certain noncitizens ordered deported for 100 days. AILA Doc. No. 21012136

 

President Biden Issues Executive Order Revising Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities

President Biden issued an Executive Order revoking EO 13768 of 1/25/17, and directing the DOS Secretary, the Attorney General, the DHS Secretary, and other officials to review any agency actions developed pursuant to EO 13768 and to take action, including issuing revised guidance, as appropriate. AILA Doc. No. 21012135

 

Presidential Proclamation on Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to the United States

President Biden issued a proclamation revoking EO 13780, PP 9645, PP 9723, and PP 9983. The proclamation directs the DOS secretary to direct embassies/consulates, consistent with visa processing procedures, including any related to COVID-19, to resume visa processing consistent with the revocations. AILA Doc. No. 21012002

 

President Biden Issues Executive Order on Promoting COVID-19 Safety in Domestic and International Travel

President Biden issued an EO, which, among other things, directs government officials to assess CDC’s order requiring a negative COVID test from airline passengers traveling to the U.S., and to take “further appropriate regulatory action” to implement public health measures for international travel. AILA Doc. No. 21012300

 

Presidential Proclamation Terminating Restrictions on Entry of Certain Travelers from the Schengen Area, the U.K., Ireland, and Brazil

In light of a CDC order issued on 1/12/21, President Trump issued a proclamation on 1/18/21, effective 1/26/21, removing travel restrictions from the Schengen Area, the U.K., Ireland, and Brazil. (86 FR 6799, 1/22/21) AILA Doc. No. 21011930

 

DHS Suspends New Enrollments in the MPP Program

DHS announced that it is suspending new enrollments in the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) Program and will cease adding individuals into the program effective 1/21/21. DHS advised current MPP participants to remain where they are, pending further information. AILA Doc. No. 21012001

 

President Biden Issues Memorandum on Preserving and Fortifying DACA

On 1/20/21, President Biden issued a memorandum directing the DHS Secretary, in consultation with the Attorney General, to take all actions he deems appropriate, consistent with applicable law, to preserve and fortify DACA. (86 FR 7053, 1/25/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012130

 

President Biden Issues Memorandum Reinstating Deferred Enforced Departure for Liberians

On 1/20/21, President Biden issued a memo deferring through 6/30/22, the removal of any Liberian national, or person without nationality who last habitually resided in Liberia, who is present in the U.S. and who was under a grant of DED as of 1/10/21. (86 FR 7055, 1/25/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012131

 

President Biden Issues Executive Order Revoking Prior Presidential Actions Excluding Undocumented Immigrants from the Apportionment Base Following the Decennial Census

On 1/20/21, President Biden issued an executive order revoking prior presidential actions that sought to exclude undocumented immigrants from the apportionment base following the 2020 census. (86 FR 7015, 1/25/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012134

 

Presidential Proclamation Terminating Emergency with Respect to the U.S. Southern Border and Redirecting Funds Diverted to Border Wall Construction

President Biden issued a proclamation terminating the national emergency declared by Proclamation 9844, and continued on 2/13/20 and 1/15/21. The proclamation directs officials to pause work on construction on the southern border wall and to develop a plan to redirect funds and repurpose contracts. AILA Doc. No. 21012132

 

President Trump Issues Memorandum on Deferred Enforced Departure for Certain Venezuelans

On 1/19/21, President Trump issued a memo directing DHS and DOS to defer, with certain exceptions, for 18 months the removal of any Venezuelan national, or individual without nationality who last habitually resided in Venezuela, who is present in the U.S. as of 1/20/21. (86 FR 6845, 1/25/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012030

 

Supreme Court Vacates Decision of Ninth Circuit in ICE v. Padilla

The U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari, vacated the judgment of the Ninth Circuit, and remanded for further consideration in light of DHS v. Thuraissigiam. (ICE, et al. v. Padilla, et al., 1/11/21) AILA Doc. No. 21011934

 

BIA Rules §58-37-8(2)(a)(i) of the Utah Code Is Divisible with Respect to the Specific Controlled Substance Involved in Statue Violation

The BIA ruled that §58-37-8(2)(a)(i) of the Utah Code, which criminalizes possession or use of a controlled substance, is divisible with respect to the specific “controlled substance” involved in a violation of that statute. Matter of Dikhtyar, 28 I&N Dec. 214 (BIA 2021) AILA Doc. No. 21012237

 

CA1 Remands Asylum and Withholding Claims of Iraqi National Who Worked for U.S. Army During War

The court vacated and remanded the BIA’s denial of the asylum and withholding of removal claims of the petitioner, who feared that he would be subjected to harm on account of his work as a paid contractor for the U.S. Army during the war in Iraq. (Al Amiri v. Rosen, 1/11/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012039

 

CA4 Remands Plaintiffs’ Claim That DHS Unreasonably Delayed Adjudication of Their U Visa Petitions

Vacating in part the district court’s decision, the court held that the plaintiffs had pled sufficient facts to allege a plausible claim that DHS unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed adjudication of their U visa petitions. (Fernandez Gonzalez, et al. v. Cuccinelli, et al., 1/14/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012048

 

CA5 Finds Petitioner Failed to Show Due Diligence Where He Waited Eight Months After Lugo-Resendez to File Motion to Reopen

The court upheld the BIA’s conclusion that the petitioner did not demonstrate due diligence because he had waited approximately eight months after the court’s decision in Lugo-Resendez v. Lynch to file his current motion to reopen under INA §240(c)(7). (Ovalles v. Rosen, 1/6/21) AILA Doc. No. 21011943

 

CA5 Dismisses for Mootness After Finding Inadmissibility Was Not a Collateral Consequence of BIA’s Withholding-Only Decision

The court held that even if the BIA had erred in denying withholding of removal to the petitioner, inadmissibility was not a collateral consequence of the BIA’s decision, because the petitioner would still be subject to his February 2012 removal order. (Mendoza-Flores v. Rosen, 12/29/20) AILA Doc. No. 21011942

 

CA6 Says BIA Abused Its Discretion by Finding That No Exceptional Circumstances Justified Minor Petitioner’s Failure to Appear

The court held that, based on the totality of the circumstances, including petitioner’s young age and her inability to travel from New York to Memphis for the hearing, the petitioner had established exceptional circumstances justifying her failure to appear. (E. A. C. A. v. Rosen, 1/12/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012040

 

CA6 Says It Has Jurisdiction to Review BIA’s Ultimate Hardship Conclusion for Cancellation of Removal After Guerrero-Lasprilla

The court held that the BIA’s ultimate hardship conclusion is the type of mixed question over which it has jurisdiction to review after the Supreme Court’s decision in Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr, but found that petitioner failed to show the requisite hardship. (Singh v. Rosen, 1/7/21) AILA Doc. No. 21011944

 

CA7 Finds BIA Did Not Err in Denying Asylum to Mexican Petitioner Whose Family Was Targeted by Sinaloa Cartel

The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s determination that the petitioner had failed to establish the requisite nexus between his fear of persecution from the Sinaloa Cartel upon return to Mexico and his family membership. (Meraz-Saucedo v. Rosen, 1/15/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012044

 

CA7 Remands Petitioner’s Request for Administrative Closure After Finding BIA Did Not Exercise Its Discretion According to Law

The court held that the petitioner was entitled to have his request for administrative closure considered as a proper exercise of discretion under law, including BIA precedents and the factors set forth in Matter of Avetisyan and Matter of W-Y-U. (Zelaya Diaz v. Rosen, 1/15/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012041

 

CA8 Affirms BIA’s Denial of Deferral of Removal to Somali Petitioner Who Feared Torture by Al-Shabaab for Minority-Clan Membership

The court affirmed the BIA’s decision denying petitioner’s request for deferral of removal to Somalia, finding that substantial evidence supported the IJ’s and BIA’s conclusions that he was unlikely to be tortured by Al-Shabaab due to his minority-clan membership. (Hassan v. Rosen, 1/15/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012045

 

CA8 Holds That DHS Was Permitted to Substitute CIMTs Charge for Immigration Fraud Charge as Basis for Petitioner’s Removal

The court held that, in seeking the petitioner’s removal, DHS could choose to rely on a claim that the petitioner had committed crimes involving moral turpitude (CIMTs), rather than on the alternative claim that she had committed immigration fraud. (Herrera Gonzalez v. Rosen, 1/4/21) AILA Doc. No. 21011945

 

CA9 to Rehear En Banc Case Involving Derivative Citizenship

The court ordered rehearing en banc and vacated its prior decision in Cheneau v. Barr, which held that the petitioner did not derive citizenship from his mother’s naturalization because his claim was foreclosed by the court’s precedent. (Cheneau v. Rosen, 1/6/21) AILA Doc. No. 21011948

 

CA9 Affirms District Court’s Denial of Government’s Motion to Terminate Flores Settlement Agreement

The court held that the district court had correctly concluded that the Flores Settlement Agreement was not terminated by new regulations adopted by HHS and DHS in 2019, and that the government did not show that changed circumstances justified termination. (Flores v. Rosen, 12/29/20) AILA Doc. No. 21011946

 

CA9 Holds That Petitioner Who Adjusted to Permanent Resident Under SAW May Be Removed at Present Time

The court held that, under the Special Agricultural Worker program (SAW), a noncitizen who was inadmissible at the time of his adjustment to temporary resident status may be removed after his automatic adjustment to permanent resident status. (Hernandez Flores v. Rosen, 12/30/20) AILA Doc. No. 21011947

 

CA9 Reverses and Remands Habeas Petition Denial Where Petitioner Claimed His ICE Arrest Was Retaliation for Protected Speech

Where the petitioner had filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 8 USC §2241 arguing that his immigration arrest and re-detention was retaliation for his protected speech, the court reversed the district court’s denial of the petition and remanded. (Bello-Reyes v. Gaynor, 1/14/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012047

 

CA9 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Pakistani National Who Claimed He Feared Persecution from Taliban

The court held that the IJ had provided the pro se petitioner with a full opportunity to present testimony, and found the BIA did not err in concluding that petitioner’s description of generalized violence failed to meet his burden to show targeted persecution. (Hussain v. Rosen, 1/11/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012046

 

CA11 Says Substantial Evidence Supported BIA’s Finding That Petitioner Committed Fraud with Loss Amount over $10,000

The court upheld the BIA’s finding that petitioner’s Florida convictions for money laundering and workers’ compensation fraud were aggravated felonies because each conviction involved fraud in which the amount of loss to the victim exceeded $10,000. (Garcia-Simisterra v. Att’y Gen., 12/30/20) AILA Doc. No. 21012038

 

Notice of Proposed Settlement Regarding Asylum Applicants with Employment Authorization Who Were Denied Safety Net Assistance in New York

The NY County Supreme Court approved a proposed settlement in Colaj v. Roberts benefiting a class of asylum applicants with work authorization who were denied Safety Net Assistance between 8/7/14 and 11/21/17. Under the agreement, the applicants will get a certain amount of back benefits.AILA Doc. No. 21011935

 

DOS Notice Designating Cuba as a State Sponsor of Terrorism

On 1/12/21, DOS issued a notice designating Cuba as a State Sponsor of Terrorism. (86 FR 6731, 1/22/21) AILA Doc. No. 21012233

 

ICYMI: EOIR Issues Guidance on “Enhanced Case Flow Processing” in Removal Proceedings

EOIR issued guidance on the implementation of an enhanced case flow processing model for non-status, non-detained cases with representation in removal proceedings. Memo is effective 12/1/20. AILA Doc. No. 20120130

 

DOS Provides Annual Immigrant Visa Waiting List Report as of November 1, 2020

DOS provided a report from the NVC showing the total number of immigrant visa applicants on the waiting list in the various family- and employment-based preference categories and subcategories subject to the numerical limit as of 11/1/20. The figures only reflect petitions received by DOS. AILA Doc. No. 21012232

 

EOIR Releases Policy Memo on Adjudicator Independence and Impartiality

EOIR issued a policy memo (PM 21-15) reiterating and memorializing EOIR’s policy regarding adjudicator independence and impartiality. The memo notes that it remains EOIR policy that adjudicator decisions should be based solely on the record before the adjudicator and the applicable law. AILA Doc. No. 21012033

 

Duckworth Asks President Biden To Prohibit Deportation Of Veterans And Strengthen Naturalization Process For Servicemembers

Duckworth:  Combat Veteran and U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) is urging President Joe Biden to take immediate action to prevent the deportation of Veterans, repatriate deported Veterans, strengthen the military naturalization process and remove barriers to accessing VA care faced by Veterans living broad.

 

RESOURCES

 

 

EVENTS

 

 

ImmProf

 

Monday, January 25, 2021

Sunday, January 24, 2021

Saturday, January 23, 2021

Friday, January 22, 2021

Thursday, January 21, 2021

Wednesday, January 20, 2021

Tuesday, January 19, 2021

Monday, January 18, 2021

 

 

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

A better Monday right off the bat, as I had predicted and hoped! But, the work has just begun! 

However welcome the Biden Administration’s immediate actions are, they have barely “touched the tip of the iceberg” on the human rights, civil rights, and human dignity abuses left behind by the just-departed kakistocracy.

There is a mess in the Federal Judiciary, from the lowest levels (EOIR) to the highest levels (Supremes). For example, the Supremes’ totally wrong-headed remand of ICE v. Padilla (described in Elizabeth’s report) shows a deficient Court that overtly fails to uphold the Constitution for asylum seekers and whose false and stilted jurisprudence continues to advance Jim Crow, White Nationalism, and Dred Scottification well into the 21st Century. Totally outrageous!

Let’s think about the Supremes in “real life” terms! The most vulnerable among us — asylum seekers who  are being openly abused by our Government while their lives are being trashed by our legal “system” get the shaft from El Supremos. But, yesterday the same Supremos issued corrupt traitor Prez Trump a “free pass” by going along with a corrupt scheme to “run out the clock” on “emoluments clause cases” that those seeking to uphold the rule of law had won below!

Suffering, death, and unfairness to the most vulnerable; free passes to the powerful and overtly corrupt! The problems with our failing justice system begin at the top and obviously have filtered down to places like EOIR where nobody expects any accountability for “going along to get along” with the Trump-Miller White Nationalist, racist, degradations of humanity!

Quoting Justice Sonia Sotomayor: “This is not justice!” Not even close!

Judge Garland must end the White Nationalist mess at EOIR by replacing (what passes for) administration and the BIA immediately, while quickly developing due process-expert-equal justice-human rights-diversity criteria and meaningful public participation in the judicial appointment process for the Immigration Courts. Then apply those criteria not only to new appointments, but also to retention decisions for the existing judiciary which is the product of a skewed “insider only,” “prosecutor and hard liner biased” defective system. 

Some Immigration Judges are well qualified, fair, and well respected; some are not. Judge Garland needs to figure out quickly who should serve, who shouldn’t, and who the best-qualified, fairest, and most universally respected “experts” are to create “the world’s best administrative judiciary” that will serve as a model for a better Article III Judiciary!

This is also the first step to reform throughout the Federal Judiciary all the way up to the failed Supremes. A functioning due-process-oriented, practical, progressive, independent Immigration Judiciary should become a source of better Article III Judges who handle high volume and promote best practices while actually improving due process and efficiency. A big winner for America!

A “model Immigration judiciary” (in place of the “Star Chambers”) will also be the centerpiece of a new independent legislative Article I Immigration Court that Judge Garland must push aggressively to insure that his reform work is institutionalized and is not destroyed by a future DOJ kakistocracy. 

As one of my esteemed judicial colleagues in the NAIJ said, immediately and radically reforming the current EOIR while pushing forward with Article 1 legislation requires the “ability to walk and chew gum at the same time.” 

Surely, Judge Garland, Vanita Gupta, Lisa Monaco and the rest of the incoming team at Justice have the demonstrated ability to do just that!

It’s up to all of us in the NDPA, the human rights and immigration advocacy community, the civil rights community, and the “good government movement” to keep pressure on Judge Garland and his team to fix EOIR and get the Federal Judicial reform movement moving at full speed. Raise hell if you have to, but don’t let this issue be delayed or “back burnered!”

This is not a “tomorrow” issue! Folks are suffering, dying, and the justice system is deteriorating — from the Supremes to  “America’s Star Chambers” every day that the current EOIR due process and fundamental fairness disaster remains unaddressed. Courageous lawyers who have fought to save our democracy from the “creeping and creepy kakistocracy” are being outrageously abused in “Star Chamber Courts” every day that the Biden Administration fails to take bold corrective action @ EOIR!

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Justice @ Justice Can’t Wait! Fix The EOIR Clown Show 🤡🦹🏿‍♂️ Now! Due Process Forever!

PWS

01-26-21

⚖️🗽IN ANOTHER DEFEAT FOR NATIVIST ANTI-ASYUM AGENDA @ EOIR, 4TH CIR. FINDS “UNREASONABLE” BIA’S ATTEMPT TO DEFINE PSG IN MATTER OF W-G-R- SO THAT NOBODY EVER QUALIFIES! — Amaya v. Rosen

 

Juan Carlos Amaya v. Jeffrey A. Rosen

Amaya v. Rosen, 4th Cir., 01-25-21, published

PANEL: THACKER, RICHARDSON, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

OPINION BY: JUDGE QUATTLEBAUM

DISSENT: JUDGE RICHARDSON

KEY QUOTE FROM MAJORITY:

Juan Carlos Amaya, a citizen of El Salvador, seeks to avoid deportation to that country, fearing persecution on account of membership in the PSG “former Salvadoran MS-13 members.”1 Appellant’s Br. at 13–16. For that reason, he argued to an immigration judge (“IJ”) that his removal from the United States should be withheld.2 After the IJ denied Amaya’s claims, he appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). The BIA dismissed Amaya’s appeal, determining that the “former Salvadoran MS-13 members” PSG was “too diffuse” to satisfy the particularity requirement. J.A. 4. Assuming we must afford Chevron deference to the BIA’s decision, our question is whether we think the BIA’s decision is reasonable. Because we do not, we grant the petition in part and remand on this ground.

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

Great opinion by Judge A. Marvin QUATTLEBAUM! He’s a Trump appointee whom I’ve criticized in the past. But, his analysis is “spot on” in this case!

Perhaps the Federal Courts are finally catching on to the BIA’s disingenuous “scissors approach” to PSG. That’s used to “cut off” all PSG asylum claims no matter how meritorious. 

Here’s how it works. They incorrectly find that almost all “particularized” social groups fail the “social distinction” test. But, when you prove “social distinction,” they wrongly characterize the social group as too “amorphous” or “vague” to be particularized. In that manner, the BIA and many IJs can manipulate the law to reject proper “particular social groups” and keep their White Nationalist anti-asylum “handlers” at the DOJ happy, which also helps them retain their positions. 

It will be interesting to see how that works out for them if, as many of us have recommended, Judge Garland actually puts some Appellate Judges on the BIA who understand asylum law and start applying it fairly, correctly, and in accordance with due process?

In making EOIR appointments, the Obama Administration generally eschewed the “best and brightest” with expertise representing asylum seekers and applying the UN Convention and the Refugee Act of 1980 in accordance with their humanitarian intent, rather as ways to advance a restrictionist agenda of deterring asylum seekers by wrongfully denying their claims. After all, how many asylum seekers are fortunate enough to have a good lawyer like Abdoul Aziz Konare represent them in their asylum cases? Not very many!

No, the average asylum seeker, many in detention and without adequate access to counsel or research materials, gets railroaded out with gobbledegook like “Chevron deference,” too “amorphous,” not “socially visible” and citations to cases even experienced Federal Judges often don’t correctly understand. So, getting asylum tends to depend not so much on the strength of your claim (many of which should be pretty easily grantable unless the IJ is “programmed to deny” — the norm these days), but on your lawyer, your IJ, and whether you are fortunate enough to have access to a thoughtful Article III judge like Judge Quattlebaum in this case. He took the time to figure out the bogus nature of the DOJ’s standard “BS arguments.” 

Unfortunately, many Federal Judges would have just “punted” by accepting the “Chevron deference” argument for a “quick kill” without the need for much thought or analysis. After all, Court of Appeals Judges also like to “keep their dockets moving” and what easier victim to “throw under the bus” than an asylum applicant who is going to be deported to a place where he or she will be too busy fighting to stay alive to reflect on the deteriorating quality and lack of concern for fairness in the U.S. Judicial system. 

The Trump kakistocracy actually went a long way toward convincing the world that the once widely admired U.S. Justice system is now little more than a “third world sham” — controlled by nationalist politicos, programmed to reject, deny, dehumanize, and operated largely for the exclusive benefit of the rich white ruling class.

I hope that “Team Garland” will “End the EOIR Clown Show” 🤡 and restore integrity to our system. But, so far, it bumbles along chewing up and spitting out hope, humanity, and lives, while mocking any normal understanding of “justice” on a daily basis. Not something I’d want on my watch!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

01-25-21

☠️⚰️21ST CENTURY NAZISM: OF COURSE “IT COULD HAPPEN HERE” — Trump Proved That America Has the Key Ingredient Of The Nazi State: Indifference To Human Suffering On A Massive Scale 🤮 — “The Trump administration, in this light, was proposing what one answer could be: dead bodies, piled up until they’re out of view. The country, it seems, can live with that.”

 

Death On The Rio Grande
Supremes Sign Death Warrants For Vulnerable Refugees, Trash Refugee Act of 1980
Trump Dumping Asylum Seekers in Hondiras
Dumping Asylum Seekers in Honduras
Artist: Monte Wolverton
Reproduced under license
Star Chamber Justice
“Justice”
Star Chamber
Style

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/01/trump-what-we-learned-suffering-death.html

Tom Scocca writes in Slate:  

This is part of What We Learned, a series of reflections on the meaning and legacy of the Trump years.

One of the last things the Trump administration did, while it still had the power to do it, was reportedly kidnap a 9-year-old boy from his family. Customs and Border Protection officials at San Francisco International Airport denied entry to 19-year-old Christian Laporte and his younger brother, Vladimir Fardin, traveling from Haiti on U.S.-issued student and tourist visas respectively last Sunday—and then separated them from each other, declared Vladimir to therefore be an unaccompanied minor, and shipped him off to a detention center.

This was, by this point in Donald Trump’s term, not particularly surprising. Child abuse was at the center of the country’s immigration policy for these past four years, part of an intentional effort to scare people away from trying to come here. Hundreds of children disappeared into custody with no effort to keep track of them or reunite them with their families. A regime that had already been inhumane under President Obama, pushing migrants toward deadly desert crossings, turned fully malignant, with federal agents destroying water supplies and prosecutors targeting humanitarian workers. Asylum laws were cast aside.

On one level, this was straightforwardly racist, joining the goals of white nationalist policymakers like Stephen Miller to the daily bigotry of many border patrol officers. Rhetorically and conceptually, though, it was an effort to roll back the consensus that the United States is a nation of immigrants. The attack extended to legally documented immigration and residency, and on to citizenship itself, breaking precedent to strip people of what had seemed like a secure membership in the nation.

As Adam Serwer indelibly wrote, the cruelty of this was the point. The politics of Trumpism were built around white people sharing in rituals of viciousness and exclusion, coming together to follow their leader’s rejection of their designated enemies and to revel in how far things would go.

But the longer the administration wore on, the more the cruelty seemed to have another, horrifyingly practical point behind it. Trumpism was not just testing how hateful the country could be. It was exploring the limits of America’s capacity for indifference.

By the end, there were no limits to be found. The people thrown into detention at the border or deported at random may have been the first to be treated as nonpersons, but they soon had more company than anyone could count. Hurricane Maria hit U.S. territory in Puerto Rico, and the administration simply failed to respond, leaving hundreds and then thousands of people to die. It was Katrina all over again, except it wasn’t: No real lasting blame attached itself to the government’s deadly failure. The death toll rarely made it to the top of any lists of the president’s wrongdoing.

. . . .

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

Read the rest of the article t the link.

Readers of Courtside over the past few years know all about this: “Dred Scottification” — dehumanization of “the other” — often the most vulnerable among us.

It’s the the basic policy of large numbers of GOP politicos, many Federal Judges (including, disgracefully, GOP-appointed Supremes who routinely hide their inhumanity behind wooden, wrong-headed legalisms and complete gobbledygook designed to screen them from the stench of decaying humanity they have betrayed), lots of bureaucrats, and about 74 million American voters who voted to retain a cruel, incompetent, neo-Nazi and his regime based on 30,500 outrageous lies and false narratives, most of them overtly racist, misogynist, bigoted, dehumanizing, or all all of the foregoing. 

These are NOT “differences of opinion” or “conservative v liberal philosophy.” Not by any means! They are differences in humanity: how we value truth, justice, and the essence of our fellow humans’ right to exist. 

The good news is that there were at least seven million more of those of us willing to give humanity a shot. But, coming to an “equilibrium” in a democracy where nearly half the voting population rejects the basic principles of democracy and indeed the humanity of much of our majority and most of the world beyond us, won’t be easy. 

PWS

01-25-21

🇺🇸⚖️🗽PROFESSOR CRISTINA RODRIGUEZ @ YALE LAW:  Biden’s Lasting Immigration/Human Rights/Social Justice Reforms & Legacy Will Depend On Replacing 🧹 The Bureaucratic Immigration Kakistocracy 🏴‍☠️☠️🤮 Left Behind By The Regime! — It’s Time For “The EOIR Clown Show” 🤡🦹🏿‍♂️☠️ To Go! — BONUS PWS MINI-ESSAY: “THE BATTLE FOR DUE PROCESS @ JUSTICE ISN’T OVER: Flailing, Failing Department Needs A Bureaucratic House-Cleaning, Now!”

Cristina Rodriguez
Professor Cristina Rodriguez
Yale Law
Photo: Twitter

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/fixing-trumps-damage-to-government-will-take-more-than-executive-orders/2021/01/22/5e3c50f8-5c2d-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html

Professor Christina Rodriguez in WashPost:

. . . .

As the Migration Policy Institute has shown, the Trump-era changes to the immigration system numbered in the hundreds and consisted of dramatic reinterpretations of the laws alongside seemingly clerical changes, such as revised application forms for visas, higher fees and tighter deadlines in immigration courts — all to advance a maximalist enforcement agenda and slow down the ordinary gears of immigrant admissions. High-level White House advisers, working with knowledgeable allies in the Homeland Security and Justice departments, pushed out regulation after regulation to render asylum laws more restrictive and make it harder for noncitizens to present their case in immigration courts. Trump’s attorneys general exerted unprecedented authority to define asylum laws to severely limit claims by victims of domestic and gang violence, and to constrain immigration judges’ ability to grant relief and manage their dockets in a way that provides a semblance of due process.

. . . .

And yet, the new administration’s policy agenda will not be complete unless legislative proposals are accompanied by concerted executive action across the administrative state, and not just because ambitious legislation on any issue faces an uphill climb in a Senate with the narrowest of Democratic majorities. Even when it comes to pass, legislation emerges from a bargain, leaving issues unaddressed, introducing new concepts to be interpreted and creating new programs that demand administration. Changing the direction of our government requires not only executive vision, but also multilayered strategies that make their way through the bureaucracy and down to the ground — along with the stamina and patience to see them through.

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

THE BATTLE FOR DUE PROCESS @ JUSTICE ISN’T OVER: Flailing, Failing Department Needs A Bureaucratic House-Cleaning, Now!

By Paul Wickham Schmidt

Courtside Exclusive

Jan. 24, 2021

Read Cristina’s complete article at the link. The book that she and Adam Cox wrote The President and Immigration Law along with that of my friend and colleague Professor Phil Schrag, Baby Jails, should be required reading for all incoming Biden-Harris officials.

A “democracy” that doesn’t understand how it came to run prisons for vulnerable kids and star chambers for legal asylum seekers, and how to end them immediately, can expect little success in achieving social justice, promoting economic equality and prosperity for all, or leading and advocating for democracy abroad. 

It all starts with immigration. I can draw a straight line from the Muslim Ban, to the Roberts’ Court’s disgraceful and cowardly abdication of responsibility to stop it in its tracks (grotesquely undermining the many lower court Federal Judges who had courageously “mapped it out for them”), to GOP politicos running around undermining our free and fair elections, to “magamorons” and other traitor/crazies storming the Capitol. Folks “get” the abdication of moral responsibility and legal accountability when it is delivered by those who should be standing up for democracy.

The failure of career civil servants at all levels to “just say no” and rebel against these outrageous failures of Constitutional governance and simple human decency, combined with a horribly deficient Supremes’ majority that abandoned both legal legitimacy and moral leadership, created a beyond dangerous pattern that came very close to toppling two centuries of the “democratic experiment” and still has the future of our democratic republic “on the ropes.” 

Just look at what happened at the DOJ in the final weeks of the regime! Government officials who knew better settled for “heading off” a President’s treasonous acts rather than exposing them to the public, the Vice President, and leaders of Congress (perhaps other than treacherous co-conspirator Kevin McCarthy) who could have taken action for the immediate removal of this “clear and present threat” to our national security from the office for which he was so completely unqualified. Who knows, they might even have stopped the insurrection!

Look at the failed and ethically vapid Solicitor General’s Office (once, but no longer, one of the “Jewels in the Crown” of Government) that time and time again moved forward to defend unethical and unconstitutional policies before a willing Supremes’ majority based on patently false narratives and obvious pretexts (not very convincingly) concealing the overt racist, White Nationalist agenda of Trump, Miller, and the other neo-Nazis who had seized control of large portions of our governing machinery. Who, with the disgraceful complicity of the Supremes, turned American asylum law from the life-saving humanitarian refuge it was intended to be to instead an ugly weapon of racism, xenophobia, misogyny, child abuse, death, torture, unjust imprisonment, and overall dehumanization of the most vulnerable among us! What’s wrong with this picture? Everything!

Checks and balances and the courage and integrity of a professional career civil service are supposed to halt abuses like this, even in the face of failure of one of our two major political parties and our highest Court to act with integrity and adhere to democratic norms! But, with a few exceptions, courageous folks like U.S. Immigration Judge Ashley Tabaddor, Col. Alexander Vindman, and others like them, it did not happen over the past four years. That nearly cost us our country! (Note that Tabaddor, Vindmin, and others like them were punished, with the disgraceful treasonists from the GOP looking on and actually cheerleading, for speaking out and upholding their oaths of office.) 

Buried in the carnage of the departed regime are the many lives unnecessarily lost, futures ruined, and lasting trauma — trauma that will continue to adversely affect our nation far into the future — caused by failure to stop the kakistocracy’s unconstitutional, cruel, and inhuman abuses. From intentionally inept COVID policies, to “politicizing” masks, to deaths in detention, to unlawful deportations to torture, to unfair, clearly political misapplications of the death penalty (basically “legalized murder”), to officially-sanctioned misogyny — this damage can’t be swept away overnight. 

Like legislative and judicial failures, bureaucratic failure comes at a cost — a huge one! The fact that it might be largely “out of sight, out of mind” to the arrogant, largely white, privileged, ruling elites and ivory tower “High Court” jurists doesn’t mean the harm isn’t real. Just that our society has enabled some in power to look away and avoid meaningful contact with the human wreckage and lasting pain and damage they have caused and or tolerated!

Already, we can see how the Biden-Harris Administration’s inexplicable failure to “take charge” at a broken DOJ is undermining the long-overdue and well-thought-out progressive immigration agenda they announced with such fanfare. Here’s what’s come to light in just the past few days at the broken and dysfunctional DOJ:

  • Seeking the illegal deportation to Haiti of a mentally ill individual denied due process by the EOIR kakistocracy;
  • Failure to repudiate scurrilous, misogynist attacks on well-known refugee woman “Ms. A-B-“ by unqualified then “acting” AG Jeffrey Rosen; 
  • Issuance by the “EOIR Clown Show” of more false narratives and anti-migrant “precedents” — basically delivering the “big, public middle finger” to the new Administration and the AG-designate;
  • Release of a blockbuster investigative report on misogyny and misconduct within the Immigration Judiciary — with no response or plan for corrective action from the DOJ;
  • Appointment of a bunch of bureaucratic nobodies to “caretaker” duties at the DOJ — including one quickly found by reporters — but apparently missed by the incoming Administration — to have had ties to the grotesque child abuse program run by White Nationalist former AG “Gonzo” Sessions;
  • Release by the IG of a report showing the role of Sessions, Rosenstein, and other DOJ officials in “official child abuse” –  without any promise of accountability for past or future misconduct;
  • A treasonous plot by the President, a GOP Congressman, and a corrupt DOJ political hack that, although thwarted, went unreported until uncovered by reporters from The NY Times!

To state the obvious, why weren’t folks with known integrity, courage, and ability — professional decision-makers with track records of upholding our Constitution — like Judge Ashley Tabaddor and her colleagues in the leadership of the National Association of Immigration Judges — put in charge of the DOJ debacle to “ride herd”on this mess, restore some integrity, and prevent any more damage until “Team Garland” arrives? Few folks at Justice know as much about the “inept DOJ bureaucracy and failure of justice at Justice” than the NAIJ leadership which has been “at war” with the kakistocracy for years!

The solutions are still out there. But, it will take boldness, courage, and some “quick thinking outside the box” by “Team Garland” to get this completely (and unnecessarily) unacceptable situation under control!

That begins with an immediate clean-up of the “immigration kakistocracy/bureaucracy” throughout Justice — starting with the “EOIR Clown Shown.” Bring in the immigration/human rights/due process experts and let them start fixing the problems! 

Stop defending the unprofessional garbage being aimlessly tossed into the Federal Courts by the EOIR White Nationalist deportation factory still running under orders from Miller and Hamilton. Have all these cases reviewed by experts in immigration/human rights/due process and racial justice! 

Fire anyone in the SG’s office who presents bogus arguments concerning fake “immigration emergencies” and illegally promulgated “regulations” to the Supremes. End the unethical practice of using one-sided “precedents” to develop anti-immigrant “litigating positions” for OIL. 

Stop appointing unqualified individuals to precious Immigration Judgeships. Remove the entire BIA and replace it with real expert appellate judges unswervingly committed to fundamental fairness and due process for all. Replace “worst practices” with “best practices.” Stop the “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” at EOIR. Cut the largely self-created Immigration Court “backlog.”

Bring in Professor Rodriguez, Professor Schrag, Professor Ingrid Eagly, Judge Dana Marks (who argued and won the landmark Cardoza-Fonseca case before the Supremes), Judge (and former BIA Judge and high-ranking DOJ official) Noel Brennan, Judge Amiena Khan, Judge Mimi Tsankov, Marielena Hincapie (NCIJ), Dean Kevin Johnson (UC Davis Law), and a “due process brain trust” of others like them! Let them start “kicking some tail,” fixing the problems, and restoring sanity, humanity, and due process to the broken immigration kakistocracy at DOJ. Now, before any more lives are lost or futures irrevocably ruined! 

Let “practical scholars” like Rodriguez, Schrag, Eagly, and Johnson “turn their research and great thoughts into action.” “A little less talk, and a lot more action,” as Toby Keith would say!

The NDPA has already shown that it can out-litigate and out-strategize the Government immigration kakistocracy. In many ways, only the abject failure of the Supremes’ majority to stand up for the Constitution, rule of law, and human decency has prevented the NDPA from completely annihilating the kakistocracy, wiping out all of its misdeeds by judicial decree, and perhaps even holding criminals like Miller and Wolf accountable for their “crimes against humanity.” 

Judge Garland is a smart person. The “smart thing” would be to get the “NDPA on the inside at Justice,” creating order from chaos and re-establishing justice @ Justice now! 

Otherwise, smart or not, he’s likely to spend the bulk of his tenure as a “caption” on the never-ending avalanche of new legal actions filed against the deadly immigration bureaucracy by the NDPA. Because, I promise that the fight for due process in immigration and human rights isn’t over! It has just begun! 

There is lots to be gained by working together to solve these problems. But if it takes litigation, continuing conflict, and a never-ending political and press crusade against an Administration I otherwise support to get the job done, so be it!

The battle isn’t over until the kakistocracy is removed, at every level, and due process, fundamental fairness, equal justice, and respect for human dignity — all both Constitutional and human rights — become a reality for all persons in America (including those physically present at our borders) rather than just the cruel, unfulfilled promises they have been to date.

Due Process Can’t And Won’t Wait! Due Process Forever!

PWS

01-24-22

 *******************

GO PACK GO!

Green Bay Packers
Green Bay Packers
Aaron Rodgers
Aaron Rodgers
Quarterback
Green Bay Packers
Devante Adams
Devante Adams
Wide Receiver
Green Bay Packers

 

⚖️JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR RIPS COLLEAGUES IN BLISTERING DISSENT AS THEY SHOW DISREGARD FOR DUE PROCESS AND EMBRACE BIAS IN ILLEGALLY DEPORTING MENTALLY ILL HAITIAN TO LIKELY DEATH, TORTURE W/O ANY PRETENSE OF “DUE PROCESS” — Where Is The Biden Administration? — Why Is Acting AG “Monty Python” Putting His Name On This Outrageous Miscarriage Of Justice!

This could be the first test of whether the Haitian community will have their rights and humanity recognized by the Biden-Harris Administration. Or will it be a continuation of double standards and dehumanization of “the other?” 

Plenty of due process for deranged orangey-white ex-President who instigated treasonous insurrection against American Government!

Not so much for a mentally ill Haitian who is being railroaded by a biased broken system powered by overt institutionalized racism and White Nationalism at all levels! 

https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a111_8nj9.pdf__;!!LkSTlj0I!RExGxyvyVT8lz52Rw77oyR9UVhJk5Le2IlGmhRqiuqfoBAZlySvqlLyTJht4xwM5Tkv_PQ$

Here’s the complete Sotomayor dissent in Francois v. Wilkinson:

Cite as: 592 U. S. ____ (2021) 1 SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

_________________

No. 20A111 _________________

ALEX FRANCOIS v. ROBERT M. WILKINSON, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL

ON APPLICATION FOR STAY OF REMOVAL [January 22, 2021]

The application for stay of removal presented to JUSTICE ALITO and by him referred to the Court is denied.

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, dissenting from the denial of appli- cation for stay.

Alex Francois is a 61-year-old Haitian national who came to the United States unlawfully when he was 19 and has lived here ever since. Francois suffers from severe mental illness, including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and psy- chosis. He presents compelling evidence that, if he is re- moved to Haiti, he will be targeted for cruel and dehuman- izing mistreatment because of his mental illness. An Immigration Judge (IJ) therefore granted Francois with- holding of removal in 2019, guaranteeing that he would not be sent to Haiti. That should have been the end of this case.

Instead, Francois now faces imminent removal to Haiti. Rather than deferring to the IJ’s factual findings, as the law requires, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) ig- nored them and remanded the case back to the IJ for fur- ther factfinding. On remand, the IJ reviewed the very same evidentiary record on which it had previously relied to grant Francois relief. This time, however, the IJ denied Francois withholding of removal, contradicting not only its prior decision but also key evidence that the IJ claimed to be crediting. The BIA dismissed Francois’ appeal.

Francois is currently seeking review of the BIA’s decision

2 FRANCOIS v. WILKINSON SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting

before the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Gov- ernment, however, plans to remove Francois before he can even submit his opening brief. This is exactly the kind of circumstance that calls for a temporary stay of removal. Francois is likely to prevail on appeal; he will suffer irrepa- rable harm absent a stay; and the public interest strongly favors protecting Francois from wrongful removal and the terrible suffering awaiting him in Haiti. Yet, without ex- planation, the Fifth Circuit denied a stay. Today, this Court does the same. I dissent.

I

Francois came to the United States in 1979 to reunite with his father, a Haitian exile who became an American citizen. Francois spent much of his life in New York City, where he worked in construction and raised a family, in- cluding six children. Two of his children went on to serve in the U. S. Army, including one who deployed to Afghanistan.

According to his father, Francois’ struggles with mental illness began in his midforties. He experienced delusions, irritability, and aggression, and as his condition deterio- rated, he engaged in unusual behavior such as eating grass and drinking his own urine. Francois also developed a lengthy criminal history, which appears to stem from the effects of his illnesses. He has been hospitalized numerous times, and he is currently being treated with psychotropic medication.

In 2018, the Government sought to have Francois de- clared removable from the United States because he was not lawfully admitted. The IJ sustained the charge of re- movability. But the IJ also deemed Francois mentally in- competent and allowed his attorney to apply for withhold- ing of removal on his behalf. Withholding of removal prevents the Government from removing a noncitizen to a

Cite as: 592 U. S. ____ (2021) 3

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting

country where it is more likely than not that the nonciti- zen’s “life or freedom would be threatened” on account of a protected ground. 8 U. S. C. §1231(b)(3)(A). There is no dispute in this case that Francois’ mental illness is one such protected ground. See App. A to Application for Stay (IJ Decision, p. 5, n. 2).

To prove a likelihood of persecution, Francois submitted an expert declaration explaining that mental illness is poorly understood and stigmatized in Haiti. “[B]izarre, er- ratic and non-compliant behavior is often responded to with extreme physical punishment, torture, and isolation,” in- cluding locking the mentally ill in “crawlspaces or other tiny spaces.” App. K to Application for Stay 10. The IJ placed “great evidentiary weight” on the expert’s assess- ment, concluding that Francois more likely than not will be persecuted on account of his mental illness if removed to Haiti. App. A to Application for Stay (IJ Decision, at 5, n. 3). Specifically, as a deportee with a criminal record, Francois will face detention in an “overcrowded, disease-in- fested” prison “lacking in basic necessities such as plumb- ing and electricity.” Id., at 5. Because of his mental illness, Francois’ suffering will be “made worse” “due to lack of ac- cess to medication or treatment and extreme repressive measures such as physical punishment, torture and isola- tion.” Ibid. Even if Francois is not detained, his symptoms will more likely than not “attract the attention of Haitian authorities or private actors” whom the Haitian Govern- ment is unwilling or unable to control, “who will persecute him on account of ” his mental illness. Id., at 6. Accord- ingly, the IJ granted Francois withholding of removal.

The Government appealed to the BIA, arguing that the IJ “erred in finding” that Francois will likely be persecuted on account of his mental illness. App. B to Application for Stay 3. The BIA may not, however, “engage in de novo re- view of findings of fact determined by an immigration judge.” 8 CFR §1003.1(d)(3)(i) (2020). Instead, the BIA may

4 FRANCOIS v. WILKINSON SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting

review such findings “only to determine whether the find- ings of the immigration judge are clearly erroneous.” Ibid. Under that standard, even if the BIA would interpret the evidentiary record differently, the BIA was required to de- fer to the IJ’s view of the evidence as long as it was “plausi- ble.” Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U. S. 564, 574 (1985).

Rather than attempting to find clear error, the BIA side- stepped the standard of review by implausibly concluding that the IJ had failed entirely to make certain critical fac- tual findings. The BIA remanded with instructions for the IJ to determine “whether [Francois] will be singled out in- dividually for persecution,” what “harm [Francois] is likely to suffer in Haiti,” and “whether such harm would be on account of his membership in his proposed particular social group” (i.e., the severely mentally ill). App. B to Application for Stay 2.

In reality, the IJ had already repeatedly concluded that Francois “will more likely than not be persecuted on ac- count of” his mental illness, including through “physical punishment, torture and isolation.” App. A to Application for Stay (IJ Decision, at 5–6, and n. 3). The IJ thus recog- nized the BIA’s order for what it was: an instruction to change those findings. “Reviewing the evidentiary record again, in light of the Board’s decision,” the IJ concluded that Francois would not likely be persecuted on account of his mental illness. App. C to Application for Stay (IJ Decision on Remand, at 4). The IJ admitted no additional evidence to justify its 180-degree turn; it simply recharacterized the old evidence. To take just one example, the IJ claimed on remand that Francois’ expert “opine[d] that future persecu- tion on account of [Francois’] mental health issue is possi- ble, while stopping short of saying that it is probable.” Id., at 6. In fact, as the IJ recognized in its first decision, the expert clearly found that “it is very likely that Mr. Francois will suffer serious and irreparable harm amounting to tor-

Cite as: 592 U. S. ____ (2021) 5

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting

ture if deported to Haiti,” and that “both his criminal depor- tee status and mental illness are likely to result in vio- lence.” App. K to Application for Stay 30–31.

Francois appealed to the BIA. The BIA acknowledged “extensive evidence in the record of the mistreatment of the mentally ill [in Haiti,] particularly when detained or hospi- talized.” App. D to Application for Stay 4. It also noted the expert’s use of phrases like “‘often,’” “‘routinely,’” and “‘more likely’” to describe the probability of harm to the mentally ill. Id., at 2–3. But this time, the BIA concluded that it was bound by the clear-error standard to respect the IJ’s findings and dismissed Francois’ appeal.

On December 1, 2020, Francois filed a petition for review with the Fifth Circuit. On December 16, the Government notified Francois that he would be removed to Haiti on De- cember 22, just six days later. Francois requested a stay of removal from the Fifth Circuit so that he could complete his appeal. Without explanation, the Fifth Circuit denied a stay. App. I to Application for Stay. It then set a briefing schedule beginning in February 2021.

Francois now seeks a stay of removal from this Court.

II

“It takes time to decide a case on appeal,” and “if a court takes the time it needs, the court’s decision may in some cases come too late for the party seeking review.” Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. 418, 421 (2009). This is such a case. If Francois is removed to Haiti as the Government intends, he will suffer extreme harm before any federal court has had an opportunity to address his claims for relief.

Courts have an important tool for addressing such a sit- uation: the power to issue a temporary stay. A stay “allows an appellate court to act responsibly,” preventing the need for “justice on the fly” or, worse, the denial of justice alto- gether. Id., at 427. The decision to issue a stay is guided by four factors: “ ‘(1) whether the stay applicant has made a

6 FRANCOIS v. WILKINSON SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting

strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially in- jure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies.’” Id., at 434. The first two factors “are the most critical.” Ibid.

Under this standard, Francois is plainly entitled to a stay. Most importantly, he has shown a strong likelihood that his appeal will succeed on the merits. As the IJ origi- nally recognized, the record clearly proves that Francois more likely than not will be persecuted on account of his mental illness if removed to Haiti. In its first decision re- manding the case, the BIA abused its discretion by ignoring the IJ’s findings. See, e.g., Vitug v. Holder, 723 F. 3d 1056, 1064 (CA9 2013) (finding an abuse of discretion where “the BIA ignored factual findings of the IJ that were key to the IJ’s holding”). Exacerbating the BIA’s error, the IJ on re- mand issued a decision that is entirely unsupported by the record. The expert, whom the IJ credited, was clear: Fran- cois “will be specifically targeted for violence by prison and police officials, over and above the usual harsh treatment of Haitian criminal deportees, when—as his psychiatric rec- ords show—he exhibits symptoms of his mental conditions that will be disturbing and disruptive.” App. K to Applica- tion for Stay 31.

For the same reasons, Francois has shown that he will suffer irreparable harm absent a stay. As the BIA acknowl- edged, if removed to Haiti, Francois “will not receive the treatment he needs for his mental illness,” and he “will be detained” in “deplorable” conditions where “extreme repres- sive measures are used against detainees.” App. D to Ap- plication for Stay 1. As his mental condition deteriorates, he will fall prey to the very persecution that entitles him to relief on appeal.

Finally, the public interest weighs heavily in Francois’ fa-

Cite as: 592 U. S. ____ (2021) 7

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting

vor. The public has a strong interest in preventing nonciti- zens from being wrongfully removed, “particularly to coun- tries where they are likely to face substantial harm.” Nken, 556 U. S., at 436; see also Yusupov v. Attorney Gen. of U. S., 650 F. 3d 968, 977 (CA3 2011) (explaining that withholding of removal effectuates the United States’ treaty commit- ment to protect refugees). That interest is heightened be- cause Francois is currently receiving medical treatment and is supported here by his family. The Government has offered no compelling reason that Francois should be robbed of these critical lifelines before he has had a chance to be heard in court.

In light of the foregoing, the Fifth Circuit’s decision to deny a stay was an abuse of its discretion. See Dada v. Mukasey, 554 U. S. 1, 21 (2008) (noting that it “may consti- tute an abuse of discretion” to deny a stay where a nonciti- zen “states nonfrivolous grounds” for relief). Today, this Court compounds the Fifth Circuit’s error by refusing to provide the temporary relief necessary to allow Francois’ appeal to be heard.∗

——————

∗ One difference between the factors in Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. 418

(2009), and this Court’s traditional stay criteria is this Court’s consider- ation of whether a case raises significant issues that merit plenary re- view (sometimes called “cert-worthiness”). See Maryland v. King, 567 U. S. 1301, 1302 (2012) (ROBERTS, C. J., in chambers). This inquiry is complicated in cases such as this one where there is not yet a decision by the court of appeals, which often informs whether a case presents sub- stantial questions of law. Even in limited emergency briefing, Francois identifies several issues that the Fifth Circuit may address, including the adequacy of procedural safeguards for mentally incompetent noncitizens in removal proceedings and the due process concerns created by the BIA’s remand. In addition, this Court does, on occasion, intervene in cases to correct obvious errors made below. See, e.g., Salazar-Limon v. Houston, 581 U. S. ___, ___–___ (2017) (SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari) (slip op., at 8–9) (citing cases). This Court has stepped in, for instance, when it believed important factual findings were “overlooked.” See Wetzel v. Lambert, 565 U. S. 520, 524 (2012) (per curiam). A stay is not a conclusive determination that this Court will grant certiorari. It

8 FRANCOIS v. WILKINSON SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting

That leaves only the Government itself to avert this un- necessary tragedy. The Government has long exercised its discretion to halt removal temporarily, either through an administrative stay or deferred action. See 8 CFR §241.6(a); Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 591 U. S. ___, ___ (2020) (slip op., at 3). That discretion is warranted here. As his father wrote in a letter to the IJ, Francois is “at his weakest and at his lowest” point. App. N to Application for Stay 20. For now, all he asks is the small grace, to which he is legally entitled, of being allowed to remain in the country while he pursues his substantial claims for relief. Because I would grant him that opportunity, I dissent.

——————

simply gives this Court time to consider these issues.

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

The Supreme Court is in failure. At some point, the rest of the nation is going to have to face up to the implications of a group of elitist, overprivileged right-wing jurists who have abandoned the rule of law and humanity. This is exactly what Jim Crow looks like and has looked like for far too much of our history! And, disgracefully, it’s sitting right there in front of us, at our highest “Court.”

It’s a problem that won’t go away and that can’t be swept under the table! I don’t have the answer. But as Justice Sotomayor accurately said in calling out her righty colleagues in another recent case involving life or death: “This is not justice.” No, it’s a national disgrace! Appointing better justices who will stand up for individual rights of persons, regardless of color, ethnicity, gender, or status, in the future is the first step!

Also, this farce is additional evidence that the biased, unfair, legally deficient, and unconstitutional EOIR Clown Show 🤡🦹🏿‍♂️ has got to go on “day one” of the “Garland DOJ.” That’s something that the incoming Administration does have complete power to solve, and must do so! Indeed, this illustrates how every day that the “Clown Show” remains empowered at a dysfunctional DOJ is a “bad day” for American Justice and humanity!

⚖️🗽🇺🇸Due Process Forever! Dysfunctional Supremes who continue to institutionalize unfairness, injustice, and “Dred Scottification,” never!

PWS

01-23-21

 

🇺🇸🗽👍🏼😎MAKING AMERICA BETTER, FINALLY: “Mr. Biden has laid out an immigration program that would genuinely put America first.” (WashPost) — No Wonder GOP Anti-American White Nationalists Like Tom Cotton Are Apoplectic & Spouting Their Racist, White Elitist Nonsense!

🇺🇸🗽⚖️

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bidens-bold-immigration-plan-would-really-put-america-first/2021/01/21/4efa3f42-5a98-11eb-a976-bad6431e03e2_story.html

From WashPost:

Opinion by the Editorial Board

January 21 at 1:57 PM ET

PRESIDENT BIDEN has served notice that his ambitious immigration plan is in the first rank of his priorities. Some of his program will be immediately implementable; some may get bogged down in Congress, where many Republicans will regard it as an occasion to brandish the word “amnesty,” red meat for their bases. No matter. Mr. Biden’s plan is in keeping with the United States’ best traditions. It responds to the challenge of population stagnation. It would reverse his predecessor’s extravagantly cruel policies. And it is now clear that when it comes to immigration, Mr. Biden is all in.

That courageous stance was not necessarily expected or politically expedient. Unity was the new president’s campaign theme and inaugural touchstone, yet few issues are as divisive as immigration. His evident readiness to tap his modest reserves of political capital for a slugfest on immigration is a signal that the United States has returned to its roots as a beacon for refugees and a humanitarian role model among nations.

The plan is also smart. The U.S. population growth rate in the just-ended decade was the lowest since the first national census in 1790, according to the Brookings Institution — lower even than during the Great Depression of the 1930s. The number of Americans below the age of 18 actually shrank in the 2010s, by more than 1 million.

That stagnation, the product of an aging population and historically low fertility rates, cannot be reversed by immigration alone. But it will certainly be exacerbated, and has been in the past four years, by a policy hostile to newcomers. In President Donald Trump’s penultimate year in office, annual net immigration fell below 600,000, the lowest level in decades; it was more than 1 million in the final years of the Obama presidency.

What’s more, by proposing an eight-year path to citizenship for most of the nation’s 11 million unauthorized migrants — the centerpiece of his plan — Mr. Biden is attempting to align law and reality. By 2029, when they would be eligible for citizenship, most will have been in the United States for more than a quarter-century. At least 4 million are essential workers in construction, food processing, groceries, restaurants, agriculture and transportation — doing jobs critical to practically every American.

Mr. Biden is moving quickly where he can — fully reinstating the Obama-era program providing work permits and deportation protection for “dreamers,” young migrants brought to this country by their parents; rescinding Mr. Trump’s 2017 travel ban from majority-Muslim countries; halting construction of the southern border wall; and reining in the Trump administration’s aggressive deportation policies. He has also signaled he will increase annual refugee admissions, which Mr. Trump poleaxed, and scrap a Trump administration rule that denies green cards to immigrants deemed likely to use public benefits such as food stamps.

Other measures will require congressional action. Under legislation Mr. Biden is sending to Congress, green cards conferring legal permanent residency would be granted to dreamers as well as to immigrants from strife- and disaster-wracked nations who have been here for years.

The president is also pushing tougher border security — in recognition that the new administration is not inviting a wave of new migrants, still less amid a pandemic — though not as a precondition for his immigration reforms. His more impactful, long-term strategy to dissuade new waves of illegal immigrants is a concerted aid effort to boost economies and contain crime in Central America.

Mr. Biden has laid out an immigration program that would genuinely put America first.

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

The GOP White Nationalists/Nativists/White Supremacists are shaking in their cowardly boots. Why? 

Because in a diverse meritocracy with equal justice for all and government in the true national interest they would lose their corrupt advantages and disproportionate power over the lives and the future of the majority of Americans who don’t share their repulsive, racist views and did not support their traitor insurrectionist Fuhrer in his attempt to undermine democracy, disenfranchise voters (targeting disproportionately legitimate voters of color for disenfranchisement, while shrugging off the actions, antics, and influence of “magamoron” Q-Anon crazies, conspiracy theorists, and other fringe haters that he and his party relied upon to maintain power), and take over our government by force! 

Four things that the GOP fears above all else: 1) democracy, 2) accountability, 3) equality, 4) truth!

🇺🇸⚖️🗽👍🏼Due Process Forever!

PWS

01-22-21

⚖️👨🏻‍⚖️🧑🏽‍⚖️STATING THE OBVIOUS: “Independent” Judges Don’t Need Five Pages Of BS From A Glorified Court Administrator To Tell Them What Independence Means! — The PR Con Job & Gross Waste Of Resources On Attempts To “Butt Cover” For The Last Four Years Of Disgraceful Political Interference & Anti-Immigrant “Weaponization” At EOIR Continues — Judge Garland Must Put An End To This Harmful & Disingenuous Nonsense!

 

EYORE
“Eyore In Distress”
Once A Symbol of Fairness, Due Process, & Best Practices, Now Gone “Belly Up”
Star Chamber Justice
“Justice”
Star Chamber
Style
Four Horsemen
BIA Asylum Panel In Action
Albrecht Dürer, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Woman Tortured
“She struggled madly in the torturing Ray”
Amazing StoriesArtist Unknown, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/book/file/1356761/download

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

Hit the link and see for yourself the type of bureaucratic doublespeak and nonsensical gobbledygook your tax dollars are funding while EOIR continues to fail miserably at its one true mission: guaranteeing due process and fundamental fairness to asylum seekers and other migrants. In that, they have failed by any reasonable measure.

Just ask any lawyer who has had the misfortune to appear in behalf of an individual client before this misdirected mess! Indeed, some ICE lawyers are probably none-too-happy about the sometimes life-threatening, often incoherent, and health-endangering “Clown Show”🤡 they regularly face in the EOIR “court” system!

Stuff like this is an “In your face” to Judge Garland and the Biden Administration. They are the actions of out of control bureaucrats who believe they are above accountability!

Can you imagine the Director of the Administrative Office for U.S. Courts writing a five-page “policy memorandum” to Chief Justice Roberts and the rest of the Article III Judiciary reminding them of what “independence” and “impartiality” mean and directing them to contact their “supervisors” if they had questions about their judging?

The EOIR Clown Show🤡🦹🏿‍♂️ has got to go! There are plenty of well-qualified experts out there who could get this parody of a court system fixed! None of them happen to work at EOIR Headquarters right now! And, while independent judges might need a local chief judge to “lead by example” (reference, President Biden) and direct the administrative functions of the clerk of court, they most certainly do not need “supervisory judges” or a bloated, yet highly inept, bureaucracy to fairly and impartially judge the cases coming before them.

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

PWS

01-21-21

BIDEN HITS THE GROUND RUNNING — THE U.S. CITIZENSHIP ACT OF 2021 — Includes Immigration Court Reform!

 

🇺🇸⚖️🗽👍🏼

 Embargoed for 5 AM January 20

FACT SHEET:

President Biden Sends Immigration Bill to Congress as Part of His Commitment to Modernize our Immigration System

The U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021 establishes a new system to responsibly manage and secure our border, keep our families and communities safe, and better manage migration across the Hemisphere

President Biden is sending a bill to Congress on day one to restore humanity and American values to our immigration system. The bill provides hardworking people who enrich our communities every day and who have lived here for years, in some cases for decades, an opportunity to earn citizenship. The legislation modernizes our immigration system, and prioritizes keeping families together, growing our economy, responsibly managing the border with smart investments, addressing the root causes of migration from Central America, and ensuring that the United States remains a refuge for those fleeing persecution. The bill will stimulate our economy while ensuring that every worker is protected. The bill creates an earned path to citizenship for our immigrant neighbors, colleagues, parishioners, community leaders, friends, and loved ones—including Dreamers and the essential workers who have risked their lives to serve and protect American communities.

The U.S. Citizenship Act will:

PROVIDE PATHWAYS TO CITIZENSHIP & STRENGTHEN LABOR PROTECTIONS

● Create an earned roadmap to citizenship for undocumented individuals. The bill allows undocumented individuals to apply for temporary legal status, with

the ability to apply for green cards after five years if they pass criminal and national security background checks and pay their taxes. Dreamers, TPS holders, and immigrant farmworkers who meet specific requirements are eligible for green cards immediately under the legislation. After three years, all green card holders who pass additional background checks and demonstrate knowledge of English and U.S. civics can apply to become citizens. Applicants must be physically present in the United States on or before January 1, 2021. The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may waive the presence requirement for those deported on or after January 20, 2017 who were physically present for at least three years prior to removal for family unity and other humanitarian purposes. Lastly, the bill further recognizes America as a nation of immigrants by changing the word “alien” to “noncitizen” in our immigration laws.

  1

 Embargoed for 5 AM January 20

● Keep families together. ​The bill reforms the family-based immigration system by clearing backlogs, recapturing unused visas, eliminating lengthy wait times, and increasing per-country visa caps. It also eliminates the so-called “3 and 10-year bars,” and other provisions that keep families apart. The bill further supports familes by more explicitly including permanent partnerships and eliminating discrimination facing LGBTQ+ families. It also provides protections for orphans, widows, children, and Filipino veterans who fought alongside the United States in World War II. Lastly, the bill allows immigrants with approved family-sponsorship petitions to join family in the United States on a temporary basis while they wait for green cards to become available.

● Embrace diversity. ​ The bill includes the NO BAN Act that prohibits discrimination based on religion and limits presidential authority to issue future bans. The bill also increases Diversity Visas to 80,000 from 55,000.

● Promote immigrant and refugee integration and citizenship. ​The bill provides new funding to state and local governments, private organizations, educational institutions, community-based organizations, and not-for-profit organizations to expand programs to promote integration and inclusion, increase English-language instruction, and provide assistance to individuals seeking to become citizens.

● Grow our economy. ​This bill clears employment-based visa backlogs, recaptures unused visas, reduces lengthy wait times, and eliminates per-country visa caps. The bill makes it easier for graduates of U.S. universities with advanced STEM degrees to stay in the United States; improves access to green cards for workers in lower-wage sectors; and eliminates other unnecessary hurdles for employment-based green cards. The bill provides dependents of H-1B visa holders work authorization, and children are prevented from “aging out” of the system. The bill also creates a pilot program to stimulate regional economic development, gives DHS the authority to adjust green cards based on macroeconomic conditions, and incentivizes higher wages for non-immigrant, high-skilled visas to prevent unfair competition with American workers.

● Protect workers from exploitation and improve the employment verification process. ​The bill requires that DHS and the Department of Labor establish a commission involving labor, employer, and civil rights organizations to make recommendations for improving the employment verification process. Workers who suffer serious labor violations and cooperate with worker protection agencies will be granted greater access to U visa relief. The bill protects workers who are victims of workplace retaliation from deportation in order to allow labor agencies to interview these workers. It also protects migrant and seasonal workers, and increases penalties for employers who violate labor laws.

PRIORITIZE SMART BORDER CONTROLS

 2

 Embargoed for 5 AM January 20

● Supplement existing border resources with technology and infrastructure. ​The legislation builds on record budget allocations for immigration enforcement by authorizing additional funding for the Secretary of DHS to develop and implement a plan to deploy technology to expedite screening and enhance the ability to identify narcotics and other contraband at every land, air, and sea port of entry. This includes high-throughput scanning technologies to ensure that all commercial and passenger vehicles and freight rail traffic entering the United States at land ports of entry and rail-border crossings along the border undergo pre-primary scanning. It also authorizes and provides funding for plans to improve infrastructure at ports of entry to enhance the ability to process asylum seekers and detect, interdict, disrupt and prevent narcotics from entering the United States. It authorizes the DHS Secretary to develop and implement a strategy to manage and secure the southern border between ports of entry that focuses on flexible solutions and technologies that expand the ability to detect illicit activity, evaluate the effectiveness of border security operations, and be easily relocated and broken out by Border Patrol Sector. To protect privacy, the DHS Inspector General is authorized to conduct oversight to ensure that employed technology effectively serves legitimate agency purposes.

● Manage the border and protect border communities. ​ The bill provides funding for training and continuing education to promote agent and officer safety and professionalism. It also creates a Border Community Stakeholder Advisory Committee, provides more special agents at the DHS Office of Professional Responsibility to investigate criminal and administrative misconduct, and requires the issuance of department-wide policies governing the use of force. The bill directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study the impact of DHS’s authority to waive environmental and state and federal laws to expedite the construction of barriers and roads near U.S. borders and provides for additional rescue beacons to prevent needless deaths along the border. The bill authorizes and provides funding for DHS, in coordination with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and nongovernmental experts, to develop guidelines and protocols for standards of care for individuals, families, and children in CBP custody.

● Crack down on criminal organizations.​ The bill enhances the ability to prosecute individuals involved in smuggling and trafficking networks who are responsible for the exploitation of migrants. It also expands investigations, intelligence collection and analysis pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act to increase sanctions against foreign narcotics traffickers, their organizations and networks. The bill also requires the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and DHS, in coordination with the Secretary of State, to improve and expand transnational anti-gang task forces in Central America.

ADDRESS ROOT CAUSES OF MIGRATION

 3

 Embargoed for 5 AM January 20

● Start from the source. ​The bill codifies and funds the President’s $4 billion four-year inter-agency plan to address the underlying causes of migration in the region, including by increasing assistance to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, conditioned on their ability to reduce the endemic corruption, violence, and poverty that causes people to flee their home countries. It also creates safe and legal channels for people to seek protection, including by establishing Designated Processing Centers throughout Central America to register and process displaced persons for refugee resettlement and other lawful migration avenues—either to the United States or other partner countries. The bill also re-institutes the Central American Minors program to reunite children with U.S. relatives and creates a Central American Family Reunification Parole Program to more quickly unite families with approved family sponsorship petitions.

● Improve the immigration courts and protect vulnerable individuals. ​The bill expands family case management programs, reduces immigration court backlogs, expands training for immigration judges, and improves technology for immigration courts. The bill also restores fairness and balance to our immigration system by providing judges and adjudicators with discretion to review cases and grant relief to deserving individuals. Funding is authorized for legal orientation programs and counsel for children, vulnerable individuals, and others when necessary to ensure the fair and efficient resolution of their claims. The bill also provides funding for school districts educating unaccompanied children, while clarifying sponsor responsibilities for such children.

● Support asylum seekers and other vulnerable populations.​ The bill eliminates the one-year deadline for filing asylum claims and provides funding to reduce asylum application backlogs. It also increases protections for U visa, T visa, and VAWA applicants, including by raising the cap on U visas from 10,000 to 30,000. The bill also expands protections for foreign nationals assisting U.S. troops.

###

4

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

Great start!

Sure, it’s just a proposal, not enacted legislation. But, it paves the way to rapidly eliminate the 1.3 million case Immigration Court backlog largely engineered by the departed kakistocracy. Just take all the cases of those who would be covered by “earned legalization” off the dockets pending legislative action. That would immediately allow the Immigration Courts to work in “real time” on cases of asylum applicants, criminals, and those who arrive after Jan. 1, 2021.

The separate E.O. on eliminating institutionalized racial injustice should spell the “end of the line” for EOIR (mis)management, the BIA, DHS (mis)management, and most of the hierarchy of the Solicitor General’s Office, the Office of Immigration Litigation, the Office of Legal Counsel, the Office of Legal Policy, the Office of Legislative Affairs and all other parts of the DOJ involved in the “Dred Scottification” of immigrants, asylum seekers, African Americans, and other persons of color. The money saved by ending the absurd “border wall stunt” can be put to better use in reforming the immigration system and promoting universal representation of those in Immigration Court.

Sure, there will be pushback. But racist fascism, White Nationalism, and anti-democracy activism must be eliminated from the Executive Branch, starting on Day 1. Time to start taking names and kicking tail of those who aided and abetted the White Nationalist insurrection.

Due Process Forever!

PWS

91-20-21

🇺🇸⚖️🗽HON. JEFFREY S. CHASE: UNETHICAL, 🏴‍☠️WHITE NATIONALIST,⚰️ MISOGYNIST 🤮“WAR CRIMINAL” ☠️JEFFREY ROSEN TAKES COWARDLY🐓 PARTING SHOT AT REFUGEE🦸🏻 WOMEN! — DOJ Clean-Out, 🧹🪠🧻Fumigation, & Restaffing With Ethical Attorneys Can’t Begin Soon Enough!

Four Horsemen
BIA Asylum Panel In Action
Albrecht Dürer, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Woman Tortured
“She struggled madly in the torturing Ray”
Amazing StoriesArtist Unknown, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

A Parting Shot At Women

As the Trump Administration comes to an end, let’s remember how it began.  On the day following the inauguration, millions participated in Women’s Marches around the world.  There is sadly no need to list the reasons why women in particular would feel the need to respond in such a way to a Trump presidency.

It was therefore no surprise that Trump’s first Attorney General issued a decision intended to strip protection under our asylum laws from women who are victims of domestic violence.  That decision, Matter of A-B-, was so soundly rejected by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit relied on his reasoning to conclude that Sessions’s decision had been abrogated.  The First and Ninth Circuits further rejected Sessions’s view that the particular social group relied upon in A-B- was legally unsound.  The Eighth Circuit rejected Sessions’s description of the standard for proving a government’s inability or unwillingness to control an abusive spouse, for example, as requiring evidence that the government condones his actions, or is completely helpless to prevent them.

The administration tried to codify the views expressed in A-B- and in another case, Matter of L-E-A-, by issuing proposed regulation designed to completely rewrite our asylum laws, with the purpose of making it virtually impossible for domestic violence and gang violence victims to qualify for asylum protection.  Those rules, which were rushed out with very little time for public comment, were blocked on January 8 by a U.S. District Court judge.

There are at least two important cases presently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit involving the issues raised in both A-B- and L-E-A-.  Had these decisions been issued by, e.g., U.S. District Court judges, the Department of Justice would be representing the government (in the form of the Attorney General), but not the judge who issued the decision below.  But as to A-B-, the government attorneys represent an Attorney General acting as judge, and a judge with extraordinary powers.  As a result of those powers, the official presently filling the position on an acting basis (who had come to the job a few weeks earlier from the Department of Transportation with absolutely no background in immigration law) was able to unilaterally issue a new decision in the case, in an attempt to shore up issues of concern before the circuits.

So what does the new decision of the recent Deputy Transportation Secretary say?  It addresses two issues: the “condone or complete helplessness” language used by Sessions, and the proper test for when persecution can be said to be “on account of” an asylum seeker’s gender, familial relationship, or other group membership.

As to the first issue, the Acting AG now states that Sessions did not change the preexisting legal standard for determining whether a government is unwilling or unable to provide protection.  The Acting AG accomplishes this by explaining that “condone” doesn’t actually mean condone, and that “complete helplessness” doesn’t mean complete helplessness.

I’m not sure of the need for what follows on the topic.  Perhaps there is an Attorney General Style Guide which advises to never be succinct when there are so many more exciting options available.  Besides from sounding overly defensive in explaining why Sessions chose to use terms that sure sounded like they raised the standard in order to supposedly signal that he was doing no such thing, the decision also feels the need to remind us of what that preexisting standard is, in spite of the fact that no one other than perhaps a Deputy Transportation Secretary pretending to be an asylum law scholar is in need of such a recap.  Yes, we understand there are no crime-free societies, and the failure to prevent every single crime from occurring is not “unwilling or unable.”  No court has ever said that it was.  Let’s move on.

The second part of this new A-B- decision addresses a conflict between the views of the Fourth Circuit and the BIA in regard to when a nexus is established.  This issue arises in all asylum claims, but the BIA addressed it in a case, Matter of L-E-A-, in which an asylum applicant was threatened by a violent gang because it wished to sell drugs in a store owned by his father.  The question was whether the asylum seeker’s fear of harm from the gang was “on account of” his familial relationship to his father.

Our laws recognize that persecution can arise for multiple reasons.  A 2005 statute requires a showing that one of the five specific bases for a grant of asylum (i.e. race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion) must form “one central reason” for the harm.  The BIA itself has defined this to mean that the reason was more than “incidental, tangential, superficial, or subordinate to another reason.”

In the context of family membership, the Fourth Circuit has repeatedly held that this “one central reason” test is satisfied where the family membership formed the reason why the asylum seeker, and not someone else, was targeted for harm.  Using the L-E-A- example, the gang members were obviously motivated most of all by their desire for financial gain from the selling of the drugs in the store.  But under the Fourth Circuit’s test, the family relationship would also be “one central reason” for the harm, because had the asylum seeker not been the son of the store owner, he wouldn’t have been the one targeted.  This is known as a “but for” test, as in “but for” the familial relationship, the asylum seeker wouldn’t have been the one harmed

In L-E-A-, the BIA recognized the Fourth Circuit’s interpretation in a footnote, but added that the case it was deciding didn’t arise under that court’s jurisdiction.  The BIA thus went on to create its own test, requiring evidence of an actual animus towards the family.  The BIA provided as an example of its new test the assassination of the Romanov family in 1917 Russia, stating that while there were political reasons for the murders, it would be difficult to say that family membership was not one central reason for their persecution.

I’m going to create my own rule here: when you are proposing a particular legal standard, and the judge asks for an example, and all you can come up with is the Romanov family in 1917 Russia, you’re skating on thin ice.  The other thing about legal standards is in order for judges to apply them and appeals courts to review them, they have to be understandable.  I’m not a student of Russian history, but it would seem to me that (as the BIA acknowledged), the main motive in assassinating the Romanovs was political.  I’m not sure what jumps out in that example as evidence of animus towards the family itself.  How would one apply the Romanov test to anyone ever appearing in Immigration Court?  By comparison, the Fourth Circuit’s test is a very clear one that is easy to apply and review on appeal.

Of course, this is just my humble opinion.  The assistant Transportation czar feels differently.  Drawing on his extensive minutes of experience in the complex field of asylum, he concluded: “I believe that the Fourth Circuit’s recent interpretation of ‘one central reason’ is not the best reading of the statutory language.”

I am guessing that by saying this in a precedent decision in the final days of this Administration, Transportation guy is hoping that the Fourth Circuit will feel compelled to accord his opinion Brand X deference.  Legal scholar Geoffrey Hoffman has pointed out that no such deference is due, as the requirement that the statute be ambiguous is not satisfied.  (Geoffrey’s excellent takedown of this same decision can be found here, and is well worth reading).

But the term in question, “on account of,” is also not one requiring agency expertise, which is of course a main justification for judicial deference.  It is instead a legal standard not specific to asylum or immigration law.

For example, last June, the Supreme Court decided Bostock v. Clayton County, a case involving employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or identity.  In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Gorsuch, the Court explained that the statutory term in question, “because of,” carries the same legal meaning as “on account of,” the relevant phrase for asylum purposes.  In determining nexus, the Court stated:

It doesn’t matter if other factors besides the plaintiff’s sex contributed to the decision. And it doesn’t matter if the employer treated women as a group the same when compared to men as a group. If the employer intentionally relies in part on an individual employee’s sex when deciding to discharge the employee—put differently, if changing the employee’s sex would have yielded a different choice by the employer—a statutory violation has occurred.

That last sentence – “if changing the employee’s sex would have yielded a different choice by the employer” – is essentially the same “but for” standard applied by the Fourth Circuit in the asylum context.  What would give an Acting Attorney General the authority to hold otherwise?

A conservative commentator observed a difference between the discrimination required in Bostock and the persecution required in L-E-A-, stating that discrimination can involve favoring one group without necessarily hating the group being passed over, whereas persecuting someone requires an animus towards them.

However, the BIA recognized nearly 25 years ago that persecution can be found in harm resulting from actions intended to overcome a characteristic of the victim, and that no subjective punitive or malignant intent is required.  The BIA acknowledged this in L-E-A-, noting that a punitive intent is not required.

Furthermore, the legislative history of the REAL ID Act (which created the requirement in question) shows that Congress amended the original proposed requirement that the protected ground be “the central motive” for the harm, to the final language requiring that it be “one central reason.”1  While animus would fall under “motive,” “reason” covers the type of causation central to the Fourth Circuit’s “but for” test.  The history seems to undermine the former Transportation official’s claim that under the Fourth Circuit’s test, the “one central reason” language would be “mere surplusage.”  This is untrue, as that additional language serves to clarify that the reason can be one of many (as opposed to “the” reason), and that the relevant issue is reason and not motive.  Perhaps the author required more than three weeks at the Department of Justice to understand this.

I write this on the last full day of the Trump presidency.  Let’s hope that all of the decisions issued by this administration will be vacated shortly; that the BIA will soon be comprised of fair and independent immigration law scholars (preferably as part of an independent Article I Immigration Court), and that future posts will document a much more enlightened era of asylum adjudication.

Note:

1. See Deborah Anker, The Law of Asylum in the United States (Thomson Reuters) at § 5:12.  See also Ndayshimiye v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 557 F.3d 124 (3d Cir. 2009) (recounting the legislative history and rejecting a dominance test for determining “one central reason”).

Jeffrey S. Chase
Hon. Jeffrey S. Chase
Jeffrey S. Chase Blog
Coordinator & Chief Spokesperson, Round Table of Former Immigration Judges

Copyright 2021 Jeffrey S. Chase.  All rights reserved.

Republished by permission.

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

Judge Garland and his team must address systemic failures at the dysfunctional DOJ well beyond the festering, unconstitutional mess @ EOIR (“The Clown Show” 🤡) that requires an immediate “remove and replace.” The ethical failings, bad lawyering, dilatory litigating tactics, anti-American attitudes, racism, misogyny, intellectual dishonesty, coddling of authoritarianism, and complicity in the face of tyranny are in every corner of the disgraced Department.

Withdrawal of every bogus, biased, unconstitutional, racist- motivated “precedent” issued during the Trump regime and turning the proper development and fair interpretation of immigration and asylum laws over to a “new BIA” — consisting of real judges who are widely recognized and respected experts in immigration, human rights, and due process — must be a “day one” priority for Judge Garland and his team. 

The Clown Show🤡🦹🏿‍♂️ that has made mincemeat out of American justice — not to mention legal ethics and human morality — must go! And, the problem goes far beyond the “Falls Church Circus!”🎪🤹

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever! Institutionalized misogyny, 🤮☠️never! No more Jeffrey Rosens @ DOJ —ever!

And, firms like Kirkland & Ellis need to think twice about re-employing a sleazy “empty suit” like Rosen who represents everything that is wrong with American law in the 21st century! Public disgrace should not be mistaken for “public service.”

“Normalizing” political toadies, “senior executives,” government “lawyers,” and other “public officials” who carried the water and willingly (often, as in Rosen’s case, enthusiastically, gratuitously, and totally unnecessarily) advanced the objectives of a White Nationalist, anti-American regime whose disgraceful and toxic rule ended in a violent, unhinged, failed insurrection against our democracy encouraged by a Traitor-President, his supporters, and members of the GOP would be a HUGE, perhaps fatal, mistake!

Make no mistake about it! Brave, determined refugee women like Ms. A-B- and her lawyers (superstars like Professor Karen Musalo and Blaine Bookey of the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies) are the true American heroes 🦸🏻 of the resistance to White Nationalist, racist, xenophobic policies of cruelty, hate, and disparaging of the rule of law. Toadies and traitors like Rosen are the eternal villains!🦹🏿‍♂️ Picking on refugees on the way out the door is an act of supreme cowardice that will live in infamy!🐓🤮

PWS

01-20-20