Clinical Professor & Director of Immigration Law Section
Loyola U. Of New Orleans College of Law
PHOTO: Loyola New Orleans
Here’s Judge Marsteller’s decision as reported to Dan Kowalski by Professor Kusuda:
Hi Dan,
New Orleans IJ granted asylum after we filed a post-Jaco supplemental brief. DHS did not appeal.
—
Hiroko Kusuda
Clinic Professor
Loyola University New Orleans College of Law
Stuart H. Smith Law Clinic & Center for Social Justice
*****************
Here’s a comment from Hon. “Sir Jeffrey” Chase of the Round Table:
You probably already know this, but Hiroko [Kusuda] is a real NDPA star. She was awarded AILA’s Excellence in Teaching Award a few years ago, and received the NGO Attorney of the Year Award this year from the FBA’s Immigration Law Section. She has tirelessly represented the respondent in Matter of Negusie for years.
Beautifully written and reasoned decision by Judge Marsteller. Highly effective presentation by Professor Kusuda and the Loyola NO Immigration Clinic. No appeal of correct decision from ACC Robert Weir. It all adds up to a proper, efficient application of the law to save a life!
In addition to his very cogent analysis of why “Honduran women” is immutable, particularized, and socially distinct, Judge Marsteller got the nexus, “unwilling or unable to protect,” and reasonably available internal relocation issues in Honduras correct. These are things that too many Immigration Judges get wrong on a frequent basis — life-threatening mistakes that the BIA seldom corrects and never provides “positive guidance” in a precedential cases! Why?
The process could work like this in every case! Why doesn’t it?
This case is is a great illustration of a well-functioning system that EOIR, DHS, and the private bar could “build upon” to restore order, integrity, and efficiency to the Immigration Courts. It’s a shame that Garland hasn’t installed the right dynamic, practical, expert, due-process-oriented “leadership team” at EOIR and the BIA to get the job done!
Many congrats to Hiroko and all involved in this success story.
Here’s an obvious question: Why aren’t Hiroko and many other “practical scholars” like her appellate judges on the BIA, fashioning the positive practical precedents on asylum and other forms of relief and articulating and requiring “best practices” that will “move” cases through the Immigration Courts in an efficient and orderly manner — without stomping on anybody’s legal and human rights?
Why not have Judge Marsteller teach his colleagues at EOIR how to “get to yes” in the many similar cases now languishing and often being wrongly denied in Immigration Courts?
Why was Judge Marsteller able to figure out the correct answer when it often eludes the BIA?
Why can’t EOIR under Garland “build on success” rather than “institutionalizing failure?”
🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!
PWS
06-10-22