Cornell Immigration Clinic – immigrationcourtside.com

👏 CORNELL LAW IMMIGRATION CLINICS ARE ON A LIFE-SAVING 🛟 ROLL! 🛼

Two reports from Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr:

1) Hi all: Our Cornell asylum appeals clinic recently won a difficult withholding/CAT case at the BIA. On remand, the IJ granted CAT. And the client won release through habeas.

Pasted in below is a summary of the case.

Kudos go to Eva Charles and Isaac Belenkiy, the two Cornell law students who worked on the case. Even by the high standards of our clinic, they both went above and beyond for the client. And as you will see from the summary, pro bono attorneys from Morrison Foerster and the public defender’s office also worked hard to get our client CAT protection and release from detention. It takes a village to win immigration relief!

The habeas decision is at 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173280. The BIA decision is too big to attach. If anyone wants it, please email me offline.

Thanks, Steve Yale-Loehr

2023 Mexico Withholding and CAT Case Summary [IES]

Stephen Yale-Loehr, Evangeline Charles, Isaac Belenkiy

IES is a 41-year-old man from Mexico who first came to the U.S. when he was 18 years old. As a youth, IES joined a gang. He was arrested in 2005 for possessing a small quantity of drugs and was sentenced to four years in prison for “transporting drugs.” While in prison, IES defected from the gang and, following his release, was removed to Mexico in 2008. There, his tattooed physical appearance caught the attention of gangs and cartels like the Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación, who attacked him and his family, prompting him to relocate eight times within Mexico. Unable to find safety in Mexico, IES fled back to the United States in 2010.

In 2022, IES was detained by ICE and held at the Golden State Annex (“GSA”), a private for-profit prison, in McFarland, CA. IES applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denied all forms of relief, finding that IES’s 2005 conviction was a “particularly serious crime” (“PSC”) that rendered him ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal.

At this point, the Cornell asylum appeals clinic took on IES’s appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). Our brief addressed two main issues: 1) IES warranted relief under withholding of removal because his 2005 conviction was not a PSC; and 2) the IJ erred in analyzing IES’s eligibility for CAT relief.

For the PSC argument, we argued that the IJ improperly analyzed IES’s offense, ignored credible evidence that the drugs were for personal use, and instead relied on boilerplate sentencing documents. As a result, the IJ failed to analyze IES’s motivation and intent at the time of the offense.

For the CAT argument, we focused on 6 errors: 1) the IJ failed to consider that IES’s prolonged mental pain would cause future torture; 2) the IJ did not consider future torture from gangs and cartels despite an expert saying this risk was at 80%; 3) the IJ failed to admit 400 pages of country conditions reports into evidence; 4) the IJ mischaracterized IES’s attempts to flee cartels 8 times as “relocation;” 5) the IJ did not think there was police acquiescence even though the police, the local Attorney General, and the judicial police ignored IES’s complaints; and 6) the IJ did not aggregate IES’s risk of torture.

On June 16, 2023, the BIA sustained our appeal in IES’s favor and remanded the case back to the IJ. Notably, the BIA agreed with our PSC argument, the IJ’s failure to consider all evidence, and the IJ’s failure to aggregate IES’s risk of torture.

After this, IES’s case was transferred to a public defender, who represented him on remand. The clinic team worked closely with the public defender’s office to transfer all files and get them up to speed on the case.

Parallel to our BIA filing, we participated in other advocacy efforts. While at GSA, IES participated in a labor strike in 2022 and a hunger strike in 2023. The aims of these protests were to draw attention to the abysmal conditions at private immigration detention facilities like GSA, to call for a minimum wage for detainee labor, and to demand safe and sanitary living conditions for detained migrants. The 2023 hunger strike was a coordinated effort by detainees and activists, supported by lawyers working for immigration justice. This protest resulted in a class action lawsuit on behalf of the detainees and the submission of release requests on behalf of individual detainees.

During the protests at GSA, our team filed a release request for IES. Our request explained that IES should be released because he was neither a flight risk nor a danger to society. ICE denied the request. IES continued to participate in the hunger strike and was mistreated by ICE personnel and medical officers. This prompted our clinic to file complaints to ICE and DHS about this mistreatment, which violated ICE’s own regulations. At the same time, we filed FOIA requests asking for IES’s detention, removal, and medical records. We decided to build a record of release requests to show administrative exhaustion so that IES can get a bond hearing. We also found a law firm (Morrison Foerster) to represent IES pro bono for a habeas corpus petition.

On September 27, 2023, the U.S. district court for the Northern District of California granted IES’s habeas petition on the grounds that “his prolonged detention without an individualized hearing violates his procedural due process rights.” A bond hearing was granted to IES. The government appealed this ruling, but their appeal was dismissed.

In fall 2023, IES was released on bond. A week later, the IJ granted him protection under CAT. IES is now back home with his wife and children. He can now get a work permit and cannot be deported to Mexico.

In the triumph of IES’s journey from detention to liberation, our team found a beacon of hope and resilience. The hunger strikes, the legal battles, and the relentless pursuit of freedom for IES were not in vain. As our clinic celebrates his freedom, we are grateful to our partners—advocacy groups in California and lawyers and public defenders who provided advice and guidance on appeal and zealously advocated for IES on remand—and to IES’s family, who never stopped providing support and information despite their own personal struggles.

The clinic’s fight for immigration justice is far from over, but IES’s triumph serves as inspiration to press onward and advocate for other clients who are plagued by inequities in our immigration system.

2) Asylum granted!

Beginning in spring 2023, a group of thirteen 1L and advanced Immigration Law & Advocacy Clinic students worked tirelessly to file individual asylum applications for a family from Afghanistan. The clients had their interviews in April, and the clinic just received the good news that the requests were approved. Congratulations to the team!

Part of the legal team is pictured here (from left): Katie Rahmlow ’23, client, client, Don Izekor, Esq. ’23, Alisa Whitfield, interpreter Hamid Rezaee (CIS ’26), Jaclyn Kelley-Widmer, client, Amy Godshall ’23.

Not pictured: Deborah Morales ’25, Oscar F. Ruiz ’25, Nathaniel Squires ’25, Rodrigo Tojo Garcia ’25, Aaliyah Channer ’25, Yubin “Lucy” Oh ’25, Arina Gorokhovska ’25, Miriam Mars ’24, Tori Staley ’23, Jared Flanery ’23.

Cornell Law Life Savers

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

Congrats to the “next wave” of the relentless NDPA!

These are outstanding examples of why claims that unrepresented individuals receive constitutionally-required due process in Immigration Court are absolute poppycock! They also illustrate why responsible legislators and policy makers should be investing in representation rather than just spending wildly and fruitlessly on “gonzo” immigration enforcement.

No single nation, no matter how rich and powerful, can unilaterally change 21st century worldwide patterns of forced migration, which is what is generating the humanitarian situation at our Southern Border. But, we can more effectively address due process issues in our Immigration Courts, the “retail level” of the U.S. justice system!

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

O2-20-24

⚖️🗽 TRIPLE HEADER! — Cornell Immigration Clinic Wins 3 @ BIA!

Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr reports:

Paul: Thanks to the excellent work of our law students, our Cornell asylum clinic received three BIA remands this spring.  A short summary of each case follows.  A longer summary of each case is attached, as well as redacted versions of the BIA’s decisions. If anyone wants redacted copies of our briefs, have them contact me directly.

Please mention on Immigration Courtside. Thanks, Steve

1: IES is a citizen of Mexico and a former gang member.  The immigration judge (IJ) denied withholding and CAT relief, holding that his conviction in California was a particularly serious crime and that our client did not meet the requirements for CAT relief. For the particularly serious crime argument, our brief argued that the IJ improperly analyzed IES’ offense, ignored credible evidence that the drugs were for personal use, and relied on boilerplate sentencing documents instead. As a result, the IJ failed to analyze IES’s motivation and intent at the time of the offense. We used case law where crimes like sexual contact with a minor (Afridi v. Gonzalez) and strangulation (Flores-Vega v. Barr) were remanded because the facts and circumstances of the offense had not been considered.

For our CAT argument, we focused on 6 IJ errors: 1) the IJ did not consider that his prolonged mental pain would cause future torture (we had psychological evaluation reports and decided to use them for this argument). This is an underutilized argument in CAT claims, so there isn’t much case law. We used the interpretation from an OLC opinion on prolonged mental harm to bolster this argument. 2) The IJ did not consider future torture from gangs and cartels despite an expert saying this risk was at 80%. 3) The IJ did not consider country conditions and did not admit 400 pages into evidence. 4) The IJ mischaracterized his attempts to flee cartels 8 times as “relocation.” 5) The IJ did not think there was police acquiescence even though the police, the local Attorney General, and the judicial police ignored IES’ complaints. 6) The IJ did not aggregate IES’ risk of torture. The BIA remanded.

2: LRG is a citizen of El Salvador who fled to the US in 1989.  While in the US he joined the MS-13 gang. He is in U.S. prison for a criminal conviction. The IJ denied withholding and CAT relief. Our client’s info was part of the November 2022 ICE data leak, but the IJ did not address that concern.

Our brief argued that our client is more likely than not to face torture if removed to El Salvador. We posited several theories under which our client is likely to be tortured: 1) by the Salvadoran government, especially if our client is incarcerated there; 2) by Salvadoran gangs, in or out of prison, with the acquiescence of the Salvadoran government; and/or 3) by Salvadoran anti-gang death squads, with the participation or acquiescence of the Salvadoran government. We argued that our client’s identifying characteristics, including his gang tattoos and criminal history, would subject him to targeting and torture by any of these groups. We also argued that the IJ insufficiently aggregated our client’s risk of torture in El Salvador and that the IJ erred by failing to consider the impact of the ICE data leak on our client.  Finally, we argued that the IJ afforded insufficient weight to the evidence offered by our client. The IJ admitted Dr. Patrick McNamara’s universal expert declaration only as background evidence, rather than for his expert opinions. The BIA remanded.

3: REC is a citizen of El Salvador who fled to the US in 2022.  REC was not a gang member, but his brother was, and was killed by the police.  REC’s family filed a lawsuit against the police for murdering REC’s brother, and the police retaliated against REC.  The IJ denied asylum, withholding, and CAT relief.

On asylum and withholding, we argued that the IJ erred by ignoring the Salvadoran government as a persecutor of REC and by failing to assess the proper particular social group that REC had proposed, based on his membership in his family. On CAT, we argued that the IJ effectively ignored part of REC’s claim by failing to analyze whether the MS gang would be more likely than not to torture him. We further argued that the IJ’s analysis about the Salvadoran government as a torturer of REC was flawed because the IJ herself found that Salvadoran officials “misused their power” when they beat him. We argued that the IJ also erred because she did not aggregate all potential sources of torture, including the government and the MS gang. The BIA remanded.

Stephen Yale-Loehr

Professor of Immigration Law Practice, Cornell Law School

Faculty Director, Immigration Law and Policy Program

Faculty Fellow, Migrations Initiative

Co-director, Asylum Appeals Clinic

Co-Author, Immigration Law & Procedure Treatise

Of Counsel, Miller Mayer

Phone: 607-379-9707

e-mail: SWY1@cornell.edu

Twitter: @syaleloehr

Check out my Green Card Stories book:

http://www.greencardstories.com.

See more of my books at amazon.com/author/stephenyaleloehr

You can access my papers on SSRN at: http://ssrn.com/author=109503

Cornell 1 Cornell 2 Cornell 3 Cornell 4 Cornell 5 Cornell 6

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

Get all the details in the six attachments above!

Thanks, Steve! And, congrats and “hats way off” (as my friend Dan Kowalski would say) to the clinic students involved!

Interesting to contrast the careful work of the clinic with the sloppy, result-oriented work of the IJs in these cases.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-29-23

⚖️ EMILY GARCIA @ BLOOMBERG: TORTURED LAW: Official Negativity, Captive Courts, Unduly Restrictive Criteria, Subjective Standards Combine To Deny Mandatory Protection In A World Where Torture Is Widespread ☠️— “It’s sort of in the mind of the beholder,” Say I!

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/immigration/more-review-of-torture-claims-good-but-not-enough-advocates-say

The Supreme Court recently removed one procedural hurdle for noncitizens seeking humanitarian relief but the high court’s ruling clears up no substantial issues about a law they’ll make their claims under, immigration attorneys say—allowing some relief seekers to be sent back to torturous conditions.

Estrella Santos-Zacaria, a Guatemalan transgender woman, asked for federal review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s decision denying her protection under the Convention Against Torture. In a unanimous decision, the justices said federal judges can weigh in on BIA’s decisions before discretionary administrative remedies are exhausted. In Santos-Zacaria’s case, her petition may be sent back to BIA for further review but that doesn’t guarantee relief.

While lawyers are hopeful that earlier review by a federal court will facilitate a smoother process for their clients, they express concerns that immigration judges and the BIA too readily dismiss the risk of torture, and say it shouldn’t be so difficult to get humanitarian relief.

CAT protections, including deferral and withholding of removal, allow noncitizens who aren’t eligible for asylum to remain in the US. To receive protection, a noncitizen must show an immigration judge that if they are deported, it’s more likely than not that they will be tortured with government acquiescence or participation. Unlike asylum, protections under the Convention are mandatory and serious criminal convictions can’t disqualify a noncitizen. But protections are especially difficult to win, said Eleni Bakst, a lawyer at the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition.

. . . .

Paul Schmidt, a former immigration judge and chairman of the BIA between and 2001, said the process for evaluating claims under the Convention isn’t scientific. There’s no formula to plug in that will tell the odds of someone being tortured. “It’s sort of in the mind of the beholder,” Schmidt said.

. . . .

As an immigration judge, Schmidt said he and other immigration judges relied heavily on country conditions reports published by the US Department of State. Asked if he believed the reports were an adequate representation of a country, Schmidt said “certainly not.”

Bakst said statistics provided by other countries can also be inaccurate. In El Salvador, the government doesn’t allow monitoring bodies into its prisons so data on inmate torture is incomplete.

Pushing back against questionable reports and statistics, immigration advocates are aware that immigration judges and the BIA may dismiss their client’s risk of torture, and their client may be tortured anyway.

Such was the case for Patrick Julney, a client of CAIR Coalition who was denied deferral under the Convention for failure to show that the likelihood of torture was more than 50% and deported to Haiti. Bakst said that “immediately upon his arrival in Haiti, he was imprisoned and tortured.” Julney was denied access to food, water, and medicine.

Estelle McKee, a clinical immigration law professor at Cornell Law School, represented a schizophrenic man from El Salvador who was denied CAT relief. After his deportation, McKee hired a Salvadorean attorney to track down her client.

She said the attorney couldn’t even enter her client’s village because it was gang-controlled.

“I don’t have much hope that he survived,” McKee said.

McKee and other immigration attorneys agree that the Supreme Court’s decision will speed up the humanitarian claims process, though results may vary. Julney’s case was reviewed by the Third Circuit, but his outcome was unchanged.

. . . .

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

Reads Emily’s full, well-written article at the above link.

A Government colleague once remarked to me that “the U.S. should never have signed the CAT.” Obviously, that private view has permeated and driven USG policy on implementing the CAT, particularly at the DOJ where it was immediately treated as “PNG” because of its lack of exclusionary clauses. Even “bad guys” aren’t supposed to be returned to torture (in terms of legal theory, if not reality).

There is no objective evidence that torture is on the decline worldwide. See, e.g., https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/torture/. Yet the mandatory protection required by the CAT remains elusive and quite arbitrary within the U.S. legal system.

One of the best examples of how Government officials who should be insuring that the legal protections under CAT are fairly and reasonably applied to achieve the Convention’s purposes are instead promoting an “any reason to deny” culture is former AG John Ashcroft’s precedent decision in Matter of J-F-F-, 23 I&N Dec. 912 (A.G. 2006). There, Ashcroft reversed a CAT grant by the IJ and the BIA to an unrepresented respondent. In the process, Ashcroft established the “enhanced test” that to gain CAT protection, the respondent must “establish that each step in the hypothetical chain of events is more likely than not to happen.”

In other words, this is an official invitation, some might say directive, to IJs to “lengthen the chain of causation until it breaks” (which it inevitably will, in most cases) and protection can be denied.

Moreover, many CAT claims, like this one, involve unrepresented respondents. The chances of an unrepresented respondent understanding the “chain of causation” or what it means to prove “each step is more likely than not to occur” are very slim.

Additionally, even if they did understand, since many of the unrepresented respondents are in detention, they would have little or no realistic chance of obtaining the type of detailed, timely expert testimony and comprehensive documentation, far beyond the DOS Country Reports (which, by the way are only available in English), necessary to overcome Ashcroft’s “de facto presumption of denial” and prove that every step of the “hypothetical chain” is “more likely than not” to happen.

Effectively, every problem mentioned by Emily and expert practitioners in this article is essentially (intentionally) magnified by J-F-F- and other anti-CAT administrative precedents.

CAT relief is mandatory, thus suggesting a high obligation on the part of IJs and other Government officials to insure non-return to torture. Yet, Ashcroft chastises the IJ involved in J-F-F- for essentially insuring that the respondent exercised his legal right to apply for CAT and helping him develop the record. Ashcroft even took the extraordinary step of disqualifying this IJ from any “hypothetical” future proceedings involving this respondent.

At the beginning of the BIA’s quest to interpret CAT (ironically at the same time Bush Administration lawyers at DOJ were secretly searching for legal pretexts to justify torture), I dissented from an unduly restrictive BIA precedent Matter of J-E-, 23 I&N Dec. 291, 304 (BIA 2002), Paul Wickham Schmidt, Board Member, dissenting, joined by Board Members John W. Guendelsberger, Noel Ann Brennan, Cecelia M. Espenoza, and Juan P. Osuna.

There, I stated:

The majority concludes that the extreme mistreatment likely to befall this respondent in Haiti is not “torture,” but merely “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.” The majority further concludes that conduct defined as “torture” occurs in the Haitian detention system, but is not “likely” for this respondent. In short, the majority goes to great lengths to avoid applying the Convention Against Torture to this respondent.

We are in the early stages of the very difficult and thankless task of construing the Convention. Only time will tell whether the majority’s narrow reading of the torture definition and its highly technical approach to the standard of proof will be the long-term benchmarks for our country’s implementation of this international treaty.

Although I am certainly bound to follow and apply the majority’s constructions in all future cases, I do not believe that the majority adequately carries out the language or the purposes of the Convention and the implementing regulations. Therefore, I fear that we are failing to comply with our international obligations.

I conclude that the respondent is more likely than not to face officially sanctioned torture if returned to Haiti. Therefore, I would grant his application for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture and the implementing regulations. Consequently, I respectfully dissent.

More than two decades after J-E-, my fears and predictions of officially-sanctioned non-compliance with CAT unfortunately continue to be proved correct.

I also note with pride that our Round Table of Former Immigration Judges ⚔️🛡 filed an amicus brief before the Supremes in Santos-Zacaria supporting the interpretation that eventually prevailed.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

06-01-23

⚖️🗽 CONGRATULATIONS! 🎉👏 CORNELL LAW ASYLUM & CAT CLINIC CELEBRATES TWO DECADES OF SAVING LIVES & PROMOTING JUSTICE! — “The clinic has been a highlight of my legal career,” says Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr!

https://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/news/clinic_20th_anniversary/y

From Cornell Law:

News

“Juana,” a client of the Asylum & Convention Against Torture Clinic and Annunciation House in Texas, after she won asylum and was released from detention in spring 2019.

Asylum and Convention Against Torture Appellate Clinic Celebrates 20th Anniversary

February 17, 2023

Twenty years ago, Cornell Law School established its Asylum and Convention Against Torture Appellate Clinic. Since then, some 200 students have represented close to 100 clients. In a system where the vast majority of asylum seekers lose their appeals, the clinic has won an estimated sixty-six percent of its cases.

“Because of the complexity of immigration law, it is very hard to win asylum for someone,” says clinic codirector Stephen Yale-Loehr, professor of Immigration Law Practice. “We are fortunate that we have excellent students who work tirelessly to save their clients from persecution or torture.”

Emily Rivera ’23, who is taking the clinic for a second year, writes, “This has been the most rewarding experience of my law school career. From working on federal court appeals to submitting request releases on behalf of detained clients, I have had the chance to engage in work that I am deeply passionate about.”

The experience has inspired careers in immigration law—and also deeply informed alumni’s work in other areas. Neethu Putta ’19, who took the clinic for two years as a student and now contributes to its work as an adjunct professor, observes, “The clinic taught me how to artfully frame issues and tell a client’s narrative in a way that leaves the court no choice but to find for them. As a practicing commercial litigator, I now use those skills daily.”

Clinic codirector Estelle McKee, clinical professor of law (Lawyering), notes that the clinic offers students a unique glimpse into the lives of individuals whose paths they would otherwise never cross. “Our clients are brave; many have undergone unspeakable persecution and torture, and have embarked on treacherous journeys to protect their families,” she says. “Their experiences and persistence offer students deep insight into the importance of zealous advocacy.”

McKee shares some comments sent to her by clinic clients. A Salvadoran asylum-seeker wrote, “I sincerely want to thank you for all your willingness, commitment, responsibility, and the respect with which you offer me your help. Few people do what you did for me, so I will be forever grateful to you.” [translated from Spanish]

Another reflection comes from a Cameroonian client who had been found “not credible” by an immigration judge and was ailing in a for-profit prison when the clinic took up his case. Against the odds, McKee and her students were able to get the case reopened and will represent this asylum-seeker as he returns to court. He says, “I continue to appreciate your care and concern and effort to my case… [Y]ou have really been a blessing to me… I will never forget you.”

For the professors as well, the experience has been unforgettable. Says Yale-Loehr, “The clinic has been a highlight of my legal career. I feel honored to have worked with so many excellent students over the years to help persecuted people win asylum and start a new life in the US.”

McKee adds, “There is nothing like clinical teaching. Not only does it present the opportunity to provide the representation so desperately needed by underserved populations, but it also enables a teacher to help shape the next generation of lawyers while also having an impact on the development of the law.”

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

Clinical education has been the biggest development in modern legal education — applied scholarship, practical skills, changing lives, problem solving, and developing the law, all before students join the bar! No better way to learn than at the chaotic, high-stakes “retail level” of our justice system. As I often tell students, “If you can win one of these cases, in this environment, everything else in law and many of the challenges of life will be a piece of cake!”

Immigration and human rights clinics, like Cornell and many others, have been at the very forefront of innovation and the clinical teaching movement. That’s why many of the “superstars” of clinical teaching are now being “tapped” by their institutions for leadership positions as Deans, Associate Deans, Assistant Deans, etc.

Where U.S. law remains “behind the eight ball:” Bringing these extraordinarily well-qualified “practical scholars,” leaders, and administrators onto the Federal Bench and in key leadership positions within the Government’s struggling legal bureaucracy, particularly in the dysfunctional agencies responsible for immigration, human rights, racial justice, due process, and equal justice. And, what passes for “policy making” on these issues in the Biden Administration is nothing short of a preventable and embarrassing humanitarian disaster!

Nowhere is this glaring disparity more obvious than between the dynamic talent and creativity in the private sector and the “backward looking, stuck in a rut, timid, uninspired” leadership inflicted on the public by these downward-spiraling, hugely wasteful and inefficient USG bureaucracies and the poorly-conceived and too often disingenuous “policies” (actually cruel “recycled Stephen Miller Lite gimmicks”) coming out of the West Wing!

🇺🇸 America needs change. And that requires some new faces, courage, innovation, and better solutions from the USG! The talent is available! Why are we being subjected to “Amateur Night at the Bijou” — or worse?

The Biden Administration has looked in some mighty strange places to assemble its amazingly inept human rights/immigration team. Why didn’t they try clinical programs and NGOs where the “real talent” is? That’s a question that the ghosts of dead and damaged legal asylum seekers might be asking for a long time to come!
PHOTO: Thomas Hawk
Creative Commons
Amateur Night

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-02-23

🗽CORNELL IMMIGRATION CLINIC PROVES “THE ASYLUMIST’S” POINT: Lots Of Potential “Winners” Out There Lost In Garland’s Backlogged, Dysfunctional, Unfair EOIR!

Jaclyn Kelley-Widmer
Assistant Clinical Professor
Cornell Law

Professor Steve Yale-Loehr @ Cornell Law writes:

Paul: My colleague Jakki Kelley-Widmer, who runs a 1L immigration clinic at Cornell Law, just won a difficult asylum case before an IJ in Buffalo.This article summarizes the case and mentions all the students who worked on the case over the last few years: https://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/news/1l-immigration-law-clinic-wins-high-stakes-case/?fbclid=IwAR05sriR0Z4lII65_xNMBtGE40f_JOudKSI78qvcIiLQxR3JmbyscmYz9Hc

Search

ADMISSIONS

ACADEMICS

FACULTY & RESEARCH

CAREERS

LIFE AT CORNELL LAW

Information for:
Current Students
Alumni

GIVE TODAY

News

1L Immigration Law Clinic Wins High-Stakes Case

By Law School staff

April 27, 2022

AddThis Sharing Buttons

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Email

Paul: My colleague Jakki Kelley-Widmer, who runs a 1L immigration clinic at Cornell Law, just won a difficult asylum case before an IJ in Buffalo. This article summarizes the case and mentions all the students who worked on the case over the last few years: https://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/news/1l-immigration-law-clinic-wins-high-stakes-case/?fbclid=IwAR05sriR0Z4lII65_xNMBtGE40f_JOudKSI78qvcIiLQxR3JmbyscmYz9Hc

Search

ADMISSIONS
ACADEMICS
FACULTY & RESEARCH
CAREERS
LIFE AT CORNELL LAW
Information for: Current Students  Alumni
GIVE TODAY

News
1L Immigration Law Clinic Wins High-Stakes Case

By Law School staff

April 27, 2022
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Email

On March 31, The Cornell Law School’s 1L Immigration Law and Advocacy Clinic won a long-fought, difficult case in the Buffalo Immigration Court for a mother and her young children living on a farm in upstate New York, ensuring that the family will be able to live safely in the United States.
The client had arrived in 2019 from Mexico with three children under ten, including a baby. She was fleeing an abusive husband, to whom she had been forcibly married as a teenager, as well as direct threats of gang violence in her home country, whose government offered her no protection.
Immigration authorities detained her for several weeks in the winter of 2019 before releasing her with a notice to appear in court. She went to her first two court dates unrepresented, because few attorneys in upstate New York take this kind of case. Another nonprofit had already declined to represent her when she contacted Cornell Law’s Immigration Clinic.
“Asylum cases are incredibly difficult to win,” says clinic director Jaclyn Kelley-Widmer. “The process is onerous and takes tremendous resources. My students estimate that, across all the law students involved in the case, interpreters we used, law professors who contributed, volunteers who helped care for the client’s children, and administrative staff who assisted with filing and other logistics, this case took us about 1,000 collective hours over 14 months.”
She adds that the clinic was also partially basing its case on a novel argument related to the client’s marriage, which occurred while she was still a child. “The law students came up with this creative solution and found a path forward to make the claim, including by seeking multiple expert witnesses and researching country conditions to contextualize the client’s story.”
The core team of Jared Flanery ’23 and Tori Staley ’23 (who started as 1Ls) and Gaby Pico ’22 and Rachel Skene ’22 (who started as 2Ls) stayed with it for three semesters. They worked closely with the client, completely in Spanish and almost entirely remotely due to the pandemic and the client’s rural location.
The students conducted extensive research, drafted witness declarations, and wrote the briefing, involving three separate legal arguments. They also took on the trial, including direct examination of multiple witnesses, presentation of evidence, and closing arguments.
“Most importantly, the client herself has been her own best advocate,” says Kelley-Widmer. “We’ve laughed with her, we’ve cried with her, and together we celebrated this win for her long-term safety.”

**************************
Folks, these are “first year law students” in the NDPA who, with inspiration and guidance from some of the “best and brightest in American law,” (like Professor Jakki Kelly-Widmer) are running circles around Garland’s “stuck in reverse” DOJ and Mayorkas’s DHS.

I recently featured commentary from Jason “The Asylumist” Dzubow about the egregiously horrible effects of EOIR’s “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” (“ADR”) that continues unabated under Garland.
https://immigrationcourtside.com/2022/05/04/%f0%9f%91%8e%f0%9f%8f%bd%f0%9f%a4%aeaimless-docket-reshuffling-adr-garlands-eoir-screws-%f0%9f%94%a9asylum-seekers-with-long-pending-slam-dunk/

One of Jason’s many salient points was that there are lots of potentially “winnable” cases mired in Garland’s backlog that should be granted if they could only get a merits hearing before a fair judge.

As I have said repeatedly, the things necessary to transform EOIR into a “hotbed of due process” rather than it’s current state of “dysfunctional disaster” are NOT rocket 🚀 science:

More and better representation;
Fair, expert judges with practical experience;
Uniform, nationwide guidance on how to properly grant asylum and other relief in many worthy cases from a BIA of true experts and “practical scholars” in immigration and human rights;
Dockets that prioritize, expedite, and reward well-prepared, well-documented, grantable cases for asylum and other relief.

Those are the items that should have been “day one” priorities at DOJ and EOIR for Garland and his team. (Just what, if anything, has he accomplished in his time in office in ANY significant area of the law or policy?)

Instead, Garland has responded with:

Arbitrary and capricious, deterrence-driven “expedited dockets” that lead to more “ADR” and bigger backlogs;
“User unfriendly,” unilateral actions that have cost him support from the pro bono bar and experts would could have helped straighten out EOIR;
Maintaining a judiciary and “management” structure largely “designed and staffed” to “deny and deport” by his overtly nativist predecessors;
Wasting time, resources, and squandering goodwill by defending Title 42 and other indefensible policies left behind by the Trump-Miller regime.

These mistakes are NOT “small potatoes” 🥔 as Garland and some other misguided Dems seem to think. They have cost the Dems “big time” in the one overarching area where they had complete control and could have made necessary progressive changes for the common good without “60 votes” in the Senate. How many immigration bills did the Trump regime pass on their way to obliterating the law and human rights?

They have also cost the Dems a nearly unprecedented chance to show how sound legal and constitutional policies, equal justice, racial equity, and enlightened progressive humanitarianism can work to reaffirm and re-energize the essential contribution of immigration to America’s greatness and to disprove the racist, nativist, false myths about immigrants and people of color that have become a staple of modern day Republicanism.

Enlightened immigration policies could have materially helped solve or prevent some of the economic woes facing American today. They could have “beefed up” everything from the supply chain to essential workers to needed investments in rural America to the housing shortage.

Some of the “reddest” states in American are among those that could benefit most from immigrants — many of whom have faced and overcome in their lives some of the same problems frustrating rural America. But, migrants who are being illegally rejected at the border, unlawfully imprisoned, and/or then orbited to death or oblivion in failed countries can’t help themselves or anyone else. What a waste of human potential and opportunities to show what immigrants can achieve in and for America!

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

05-07-22

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stephen Yale-Loehr

Professor of Immigration Law Practice, Cornell Law School

Faculty Director, Immigration Law and Policy Program

Faculty Fellow, Migrations Initiative

Co-director, Asylum Appeals Clinic

Co-Author, Immigration Law & Procedure Treatise

Of Counsel, Miller Mayer

Phone: 607-379-9707

e-mail: SWY1@cornell.edu

Twitter: @syaleloehr

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

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

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-24-22

😢👎🏽HOW MUCH USCIS “SERVICE” DOES $575 BUY A REFUGEE? — Not Much, According To Deanna García @ “Early Arrival” — Plus Other Top News For Immigration Advocates!

Deanna Garcia — Deanna García
Immigration Journalist
PHOTO: Muckrack.com

View in browser

Support Our Work

OCTOBER 25, 2021

Hello, this is Deanna Garcia with today’s edition of Early Arrival. You can email me at deanna.garcia@documentedny.com.

Do you know anyone who would find this information useful? Please, forward it.

Was this email forwarded to you? Sign up for this newsletter here.

NJ Immigrant Detainees Worried About Transfers as ICE Contracts End

📍 Documented Original

As New Jersey jails began to terminate their contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency has started sending immigrant detainees to other jails in the U.S., further away from their families and friends. ICE told lawyers that the agency can’t release their clients because it considers them a public safety threat, even though majority of them are imprisoned over unresolved charges for nonviolence crimes. This action indicates the power ICE has on where and how immigrant detainees are being held. “We all hoped that ICE would use its discretion to release,” said Ellen Pachnanda, the attorney in charge of the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project. “As long as ICE retains this discretion to transfer, they will transfer.” Read more at Documented.

Documented is the only newsroom that creates journalism with and for New York’s immigrant communities. This work is not easy and it is not cheap. Help us fuel this work for $10/month.

AOC Revives Citizenship Bill for 9/11 Cleanup Crew

U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and two other legislators reintroduced a federal bill to put immigrants who helped clean up after the 9/11 attacks on a fast track to U.S. citizenship. The 9/11 Immigrant Worker Freedom Act is an adjusted version of a bill that former Rep. Joseph Crowley introduced in 2017, which didn’t advance to the House. New York immigrants have asked for years to obtain legal immigrant status as compensation for the work they did and health problems they’ve suffered since the attacks. Several dozens are still protesting, while others gave up on fighting. The Associated Press

New Jersey Haitian Leaders Protest Deportations

Haitian community leaders and immigrant advocates gathered outside of a federal immigration office to protest the Biden administration deporting thousands of Haitian migrants under Title 42. The group of 50 people demanded that President Joe Biden allow more Haitians to seek asylum in the U.S. “These people just want to work and find a better way of life. We’re speaking in Newark because this city is a bedrock for New Jersey’s Haitian population,” said the Rev. Jean Maurice of the New Jersey Haitian Pastors Organization. According to U.S. Census data, New Jersey has roughly 60,000 Haitian residents. North Jersey

Advocates Rally Again for Schumer to Ensure a Pathway to Citizenship

For the last few weeks, immigrant advocates have been demanding Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to work to provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. On Friday, that demand continued at Schumer’s Peekskill office. Immigrants and advocates said they help Democrats gain power in Washington, so now they want Schumer to work for them. “We’ve delivered that control to the Democrats, so we feel that the Democrats have to deliver the promise that they’ve made us and make sure that citizenship is being included in this year’s reconciliation package,” said Peekskill City Councilor Vanessa Agudelo. Advocates said they’re in talks with Schumer’s office and will continue the pressure. News12 the Bronx

ICE Investigation Discovered Falsified Documents of Immigrant’s Suicide

According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s External Reviews and Analysis Unit, medical and security staff at Stewart Detention Center in Georgia violated several agency rules when handling Efraín Romero de la Rosa’s suicide in 2018. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia and committed suicide after being in solitary for 21 days. The review discovered staff falsified documents, poorly dealt with his medication, didn’t follow proper care procedures and improperly placed him in disciplinary solitary confinement, even though there were multiple warnings of his declining mental health. The review also lists 22 separate violations of ICE and Stewart Detention Center rules by staff during Romero de la Rosa’s four months in detention and eight separate “areas of concern.” The Intercept

Migrant Caravan Breaks Mexican National Guard Roadblock

Roughly between 3,000 and 4,000 migrants left the U.S.-Mexico border city of Tapachula on Saturday morning and headed to Mexico City. Caravan organizers say that will be their last stop while they continue to attempt to secure humanitarian permits for Haitians andCentral and North American migrants to move freely throughout Mexico. But some migrants said they plan on going to the southern border as part of their push. Videos on social media show the caravan recently ran into a Mexican National Guard roadblock and broke through it, with soldiers making no attempts to pursue or draw weapons against them. Border Report

California Hires Border Wall Contractor to Screen, Test and Vaccinate Migrants

California Gov. Gavin Newsom hired Sullivan Land Services Co. to screen, test and vaccinate migrants for COVID-19 at the border. SLSCO, based in Galveston, Texas, received a no-bid $350 million contract from California. This was the same company former President Donald Trump used to build the border wall along the border. Newsom had criticized the border wall and even pushed to file several lawsuits to halt its construction. According to a report, SLSCO staff gave COVID-19 services to about 60,000 migrants at five locations. Immigration advocates and health care leaders aren’t happy about the state’s partnership with SLSCO. KXAN

Child Allowed into U.S. for Urgent Cancer Treatment and Given Humanitarian Parole

Carlitos, a 2-year-old boy from Guatemala, was allowed to enter the U.S. from Tijuana in an ambulance. According to his attorney Hollie Webb, his story of kidnapping, expulsion, lack of access to medical care and a serious illness that without proper treatment could kill him, provided him with a rare outcome. Attorneys and doctors campaigned U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials to allow Carlitos and his mother, Ana, to cross into San Diego under a humanitarian parole to give him cancer treatment. CBP granted the request after an inquiry from The San Diego Union-Tribune. The two crossed into the U.S. Thursday evening to a hospital in San Diego. The San Diego Union-Tribune

Georgia Lawmakers Consider Immigration Solutions Amid Labor Shortages

Just like elsewhere in the U.S., Georgia is facing labor shortages as its economy recovers from the pandemic. A bipartisan group of lawmakers has been meeting to figure out how Georgia’s immigrants can help solve this problem and contribute to the state’s economy. They spoke with industry leaders and immigration advocates to learn what prevents immigrants from maximizing their participation in the workforce. According to Darlene Lynch, a representative of Georgia’s Business & Immigration Partnership, about 1 in 5 foreign-born Georgians with college degrees are either unemployed or employed in a low-wage job, which costs the state hundreds of millions of dollars in lost tax revenue per year. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Biden Allowing Private Groups to Sponsor Afghan Evacuees, Small USCIS Staff Tackling Humanitarian Requests, Arizona Mayor Claims Migration Stresses Local Services

The Biden administration plans on revealing a program Monday that would let private groups sponsor Afghan evacuees and assist their resettlement in the U.S., three sources familiar with the plan told CBS News. According to a presentation describing the plan, groups of about five individuals could apply to become “sponsor circles” that would help Afghan refugees secure housing, basic necessities, financial support, legal counsel and medical services for about 90 days. This program would become an alternative to the traditional refugee resettlement process, which is overseen by nine national agencies and their local affiliates. The “Sponsor Circle Program,” a joint initiative between the Department of State and the Community Sponsorship Hub, oversees online applications from potential sponsors and helps connect them with refugees. CBS News

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services allocated just six employees to process roughly 14,000 humanitarian requests for Afghan evacuees seeking relocation last week, drawing condemnation from lawmakers. “That is completely and utterly unacceptable, and I call on USCIS to address the shortcoming immediately,” said Rep. Jim Langevin, (D-R.I.). As of Friday, that number jumped to close to 20,000 requests, which is 10 times more than the number of humanitarian applications submitted around the world in a typical year, said a USCIS official. In response to Langevin’s criticism, the USCIS official said the agency is assigning additional staff for the workload. VOA News

Yuma, Arizona, Mayor Douglas Nicholls (R) told a Washington, D.C. forum that the increase of undocumented immigrants is stressing health care and nonprofits that assist migrants in his town. “As these (migrant) numbers continue to increase, it’s going to be beyond their capability,” he said. “From that perspective we have real concern about our health care system holding up, our nonprofit system holding up, and even our economy.” His comments come as apprehensions of immigrants at the southern border are at their highest numbers in decades. Immigration advocates say those numbers can be misleading since they might represent one migrant who was stopped multiple times. They also argued that nonprofits were under stress due to the pandemic before immigration numbers increased in Trump’s last year in office. AZMirror

Unsubscribe

Documented, PO Box 250250, New York, NY 10025, United States

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

Recently, I wrote about the heroic efforts of my friends Processor Erin Barbato and the UW Law Immigration Clinic and Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr and the Cornell Law Immigration Clinic to help Afghan refugees, including assistance filing applications for “humanitarian parole.”

https://immigrationcourtside.com/2021/10/21/%f0%9f%91%8d%f0%9f%8f%bc%f0%9f%98%8e%f0%9f%97%bdmore-ndpa-news-immigration-guru-professor-stephen-yale-loehr-cornell-immigration-clinic-help-afghan-refugees-with-humanitarian-parole-requests/

https://immigrationcourtside.com/2021/10/21/%f0%9f%97%bd%f0%9f%91%8d%f0%9f%8f%bc%f0%9f%98%8endpa-news-amazing-practical-scholar-professor-erin-barbato-leads-uw-law-clinic-in-helping-afghan-refugees-ft-mccoy-wi/

I also questioned the unusually high $575 fee being charged by USCIS for these emergency humanitarian applications! Now, we find out that for this outrageously high fee, USCIS has assigned only a “skeletal staff” of six adjudicators to process those very predictable applications. Undoubtedly, that will result in unnecessary backlogs and processing delays.

Ur Mendoza Jaddoul — Ur Mendoza Jaddou
Director, USCIS
PHOTO: PotomacLaw.com

These are the types of “X’s & O’s” practical problems that USCIS Director Ur Jaddou was hired to fix. So, she needs to “get on the stick” and fix this NOW!

A drastic increase in humanitarian parole applications and backlogs was totally predictable. Why is it only getting attention after it becomes a problem and draws public criticism?

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-25-21

👍🏼😎🗽MORE NDPA NEWS: IMMIGRATION GURU PROFESSOR STEPHEN YALE-LOEHR & CORNELL IMMIGRATION CLINIC HELP AFGHAN REFUGEES WITH HUMANITARIAN PAROLE REQUESTS!

https://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/news/cornell-law-students-and-professors-assist-afghans-at-risk/

Cornell Law Students and Professors Assist Afghans at Risk

By Alexandra Eguiluz

October 19, 2021

AddThis Sharing Buttons

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Email

The National Lawyers Guild and the International Refugee Assistance Project chapters at Cornell Law School, along with two professors and over three dozen law students, are volunteering to help Afghans seeking humanitarian parole in the United States. The recent turmoil in Afghanistan caused by the withdrawal of American troops and the takeover of the Taliban has forced many individuals into hiding and fearing for their lives, especially if they helped the U.S. military, government contractors, or Western aid groups.

Law student volunteers, Amy Godshall ’23 (far left), Jason Steuerwald ’23, Ethan Taveras ’23, and Matt Nelson ’23 (far right) preparing to mail the eleven cases they filed during the first week of October.

Humanitarian parole is a rarely used avenue in U.S. immigration law that allows individuals to come to the United States temporarily for urgent humanitarian reasons. The U.S. Embassy in Kabul has been closed, leaving Afghans with no option but to either leave Afghanistan and begin humanitarian procedures in another country or stay in Afghanistan and have a family member or friend in the United States sponsor them. Almost all of the individuals who are receiving legal assistance on their humanitarian parole applications at the Law School are currently in Afghanistan.

Cornell Law students Ethan Taveras ’23, Amy Godshall ’23, Jason Steuerwald ’23, and Victoria (Tori) Staley ’23 are spearheading the project, which involves fifty law students who are volunteering their time and efforts. Aside from gathering paperwork from the families and filing cases, all four law students are also working on training other law student volunteers. Professors Stephen Yale-Loehr, director of the Asylum and Convention Against Torture Clinic, and Beth Lyon, associate dean for experiential education and clinical program director, are volunteering their time to supervise the law students.

“Currently there are about seventy active humanitarian parole cases we’re working on. Jason and Amy just filed a case for eleven people,” said Staley.

Although the project is in its initial stages, the students are facing some challenges, including high application fees ($575 per applicant), gathering evidence from individuals in hiding or separated from their identification documents, compiling all the documentation required for the application, and uncertainty with how long the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will take to decide on the applications. All these challenges, particularly the last one, are currently leaving Afghan applicants “waiting, without knowing whether they should leave Afghanistan or not,” said Godshall.

Despite these challenges, most of the students have been able to speak directly with the Afghan clients and their sponsors. Some clients or sponsors speak English; in other cases, the students are using the translation feature in WhatsApp. “We hope to file another chunk of cases in the next few weeks,” said Staley.

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

Thanks, Steve, to you and your students for all they are doing for humanity and American justice!

I must say that for USCIS to charge each refugee $575 for the humanitarian parole application seems rather “Trumpian.”

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-21-21

Two reports from Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr reports:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

From Cornell Law:

Asylum and Convention Against Torture Appellate Clinic Celebrates 20th Anniversary

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Professor Steve Yale-Loehr @ Cornell Law writes:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts: