THE GIBSON REPORT — 08-17-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

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

COVID-19

Note: Policies are rapidly changing, so please verify the latest policies on the relevant government websites and with colleagues on listservs as best you can.

 

New

  • Opening dates for some non-detained courts: Hearings in non-detained cases at courts without an announced date are postponed through, and including, September 4, 2020.
  • New 26 Federal Plaza Standing Order: All  master  calendar  hearings  for  represented  respondents  will  be  conducted  telephonically. The standing order also provides detailed information regarding requesting telephonic individuals or decisions on the papers, including requirements for consent forms waiving the right to appear in person.

 

Closures

 

Guidance:

 

TOP NEWS

 

The Trump Administration Is Preparing To Treat Asylum-Seekers As Security Threats

Buzzfeed: If implemented, the rule would take effect for 90 days and block immigrants who’ve been in Mexico or Canada within the last two weeks from legal protections.

 

Top DHS officials Wolf and Cuccinelli are not legally eligible to serve in their current roles, GAO finds

WaPo: Trump has repeatedly circumvented the Senate confirmation process by installing appointees to interim positions, and then has left them in those roles indefinitely without a formal nomination or the backing of Congress.

 

US immigration services set to furlough two-thirds of its workers after coronavirus stimulus talks fail

USA Today: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services notified about 13,400 of its 20,000 employees that they would be furloughed Aug. 30 because of budget shortfalls, which the agency hoped Congress would fill in its next relief package before negotiations stalled last week.

 

Judge: Outside experts can visit immigrant detention center

AP: U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed to a request from lawyers of inmates who have filed a lawsuit over conditions to allow a medical expert to conduct an inspection at the private facility in Farmville.

 

A Private Security Company Is Detaining Migrant Children at Hotels

NYT: Under emergency coronavirus orders, the Trump administration is using hotels across the country to hold migrant children and families before expelling them.

 

ICE Guards Have A “Pattern And Practice” Of Sexually Assaulting Immigrants, A Complaint Says

Buzzfeed: The continued sexual harassment and assaults the immigrants allegedly experienced at the hands of ICE officers were detailed in a complaint filed with the El Paso County District Attorney, the US Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Texas, and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General this week. The allegations inside the El Paso Processing Center (EPPC) were first reported by ProPublica.

 

Fear, language barriers hinder immigrant contact-tracing

AP: Contact tracers take pains to reassure patients that nothing will be passed along to immigration officials, that they don’t have to provide Social Security or insurance information, and that their contacts won’t know who shared their names and phone numbers.

 

Apple to Amazon Line Up Against Trump’s Immigrant Visa Ban

Bloomberg: The group asked a court Monday to be allowed to add the industry’s voice to a lawsuit opposing the ban, saying it’s causing “irreparable harm on businesses and the nation’s economy.”

 

Why do Americans think more immigration means more crime?

CSM: There’s a nagging myth that immigration and crime go hand in hand, despite data to the contrary. Our reporters look at why the misperception endures.

 

Dozens of immigrants in Elko area suffer after postal worker accused of intentionally discarding immigration documents

Nevada Ind: A letter dated June 2020 from the Office of the Inspector General addressed to the senator’s office explains an investigation had already been underway and determined that a postal office employee in Salt Lake City had intentionally discarded the missing federal immigration documents.

 

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

 

CA2 Limits Public Charge Injunction to Vermont, Connecticut, and New York

The court limited its injunction on DHS public charge rules to within the Second Circuit (Connecticut, New York, and Vermont). USCIS has not yet issued guidance on how it will implement these differing public charge standards. (Make the Road New York, et al. v. Cuccinelli, et al., 8/12/20) AILA Doc. No. 19101103

 

District Court Suspended Two Asylum Policies After Finding Ken Cuccinelli’s Appointment Violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act

The government dismissed its appeal of a district court’s ruling that the Trump administration had illegally appointed Ken Cuccinelli to serve as the acting director of USCIS and that two immigration directives issued by him were “invalid.” (L.M.-M., et al., v. Cuccinelli, 8/13/20) AILA Doc. No. 20030335

 

Advocacy Organizations File Lawsuit Challenging New DHS Asylum EAD Rules

Several immigration advocacy organizations filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland challenging two new DHS final rules pertaining to employment authorization documents (EADs) for asylum seekers. (Casa de Maryland, Inc., et al. v. Wolf, et al., 7/21/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081235

 

Class Action Lawsuit Challenges Unconstitutional National Origin Discrimination Against MAVNI-Naturalized Citizens

The plaintiff, a naturalized U.S. citizen who entered the U.S. Army through the Military Accessions Vital to National Interest (MAVNI) Program, filed a class action lawsuit challenging DoD’s allegedly discriminatory MAVNI-based security clearance policies. (Kaden v. Esper, et al., 8/13/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081730

 

BIA Holds Convictions Vacated Under Cal. Penal Code 1473.7 Not Valid for Immigration Purposes

Unpublished BIA decision holds that convictions vacated under Cal. Penal Code 1473.7 are no longer valid for immigration purposes because the statute requires a procedural or substantive defect in underlying criminal proceedings. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of C-H-C-, 3/30/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081303

 

BIA Holds Colorado Definition of Marijuana Broader Than Federal Definition

Unpublished BIA decision holds that Colorado’s definition of marijuana is broader than the federal definition because it includes marijuana stalks. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Arellano-Casas, 3/17/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081200

 

BIA Dismisses Charge of Conspiracy to Commit Fraud-Related Aggravated Felony

Unpublished BIA decision finds that respondent was not convicted of an aggravated felony under INA 101(a)(43)(U) where the IJ dismissed the corresponding charge under INA 101(a)(43)(M) because the loss to the victim was less than $10,000. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Gray, 3/6/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081401

 

BIA Dismisses Interlocutory DHS Appeal Challenging Administrative Closure Following Approval of Form I-360

Unpublished BIA decision declines to consider interlocutory DHS appeal challenging administrative closure for respondent with approved Form I-360 to await a current priority date. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of D-J-B-F-, 3/20/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081201

 

BIA Rescinds In Absentia Order Where Hearing Notice Omitted Word “Street”

Unpublished BIA decision rescinds in absentia order where the respondent’s attorney was not present when next hearing date was announced and the address listed on the hearing notice omitted the word “street.” Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Sayevych, 4/1/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081304

 

BIA Reopens Proceeding Sua Sponte for Respondent Previously Removed from the Country

Unpublished BIA decision reopens proceedings sua sponte following vacatur of conviction underlying sole charge of removability and notwithstanding respondent’s physical removal from United States in 2014. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Garcia-Navarro, 3/16/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081102

 

BIA Holds Georgia Involuntary Manslaughter Not a CIMT

Unpublished BIA decision holds that involuntary manslaughter under Geo. Code Ann. 16-5-3(a) is not a CIMT because it requires only criminal negligence. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Kolubah, 3/11/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081101

 

BIA Finds Exploitation of Elderly Persons in Florida Not an Aggravated Felony Theft Offense

Unpublished BIA decision holds that exploitation of an elderly person under Fla. Stat. 825.103(1) is not an aggravated felony theft offense because it does not include lack of consent as an element. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Joseph, 3/10/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081100

 

CA1 Finds 98-Day Absence from United States Was Not “Brief, Casual, and Innocent” for Purposes of TPS

The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in finding that the rescission of the petitioner’s removal order was incorrect, and that his 98-day absence from the United States barred him from Temporary Protected Status (TPS) relief. (Machado Sigaran v. Barr, 8/5/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081330

 

CA3 Holds IJ Failed to Reconsider Discretionary Denial of Asylum After Sri Lankan Petitioner Was Granted Withholding

Granting the petition for review, the court held that the IJ abused his discretion by failing to reconsider pursuant to 8 CFR §1208.16(e) his discretionary denial of asylum to the Sri Lankan petitioner, who was subsequently granted withholding of removal. (Sathanthrasa v. Att’y Gen., 7/30/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081103

 

CA5 Says Petitioner’s Texas Conviction for Sexual Assault of a Child Was a “Crime of Child Abuse”

The court held that the petitioner’s conviction for sexual assault of a child under Texas Penal Code section 22.011(a)(2) was a categorical match to a “crime of child abuse” as defined by the BIA, rendering him removable under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). (Garcia v. Barr, 8/4/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081300

 

CA5 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Albanian Citizen Who Received Death Threats from Members of Socialist Party

The court upheld the denial of asylum to the Albanian petitioner, who had been threatened and attacked by members of his country’s Socialist Party, finding no error in the BIA’s conclusion that the petitioner’s injuries did not amount to past persecution. (Gjetani v. Barr, 7/31/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081104

 

CA6 Holds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Motion to Reopen Based on Exceptional Circumstances

The court dismissed the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the petitioner—who alleged that confusion about his hearing date constituted an exceptional situation—had failed to administratively exhaust the claims he raised in his petition. (Cuevas-Nuno v. Barr, 8/7/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081301

 

CA6 Says BIA Erred in Denying Iraqi Petitioner’s Motion to Remand to Consider New Evidence

The court held that the BIA erred in denying the Iraqi petitioner’s motion to remand, finding that his new evidence, particularly two 2017 DOS reports on human rights and religious freedom in Iraq, could be significant to his Convention Against Torture (CAT) claim. (Marqus v. Barr, 7/30/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081131

 

CA8 Upholds Deferral of Removal Denial to Iraqi Petitioner with a Criminal Record

Upholding the BIA’s denial of deferral of removal, the court found that the Iraqi petitioner’s argument that he would likely be tortured upon return to Iraq because of his criminal convictions was based on a chain of assumptions and speculation. (Alzawed v. Barr, 7/31/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081133

 

CA8 Finds Petitioner Failed to Show He Would Likely Be Tortured in South Sudan Based on His Membership in an Ethnic Minority

The court held that the BIA had correctly found that petitioner, who was a member of an ethnic minority, must show more than a pattern of general ethnic violence in South Sudan to meet the likelihood of torture requirement under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). (Lasu v. Barr, 7/31/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081132

 

CA8 Finds BIA Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Denying Motion to Reopen Based on Changed Country Conditions in Somalia

The court held that the BIA did not err in denying the petitioner’s motion to reopen his removal proceedings based on changed conditions in Somalia, finding that al-Shabaab’s activities between 2008 and 2018 did not represent a material increase in violence. (Shire v. Barr, 7/23/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081034

 

CA9 Reaffirms That BIA Must Analyze Cognizability of Particular Social Groups on a Case-by-Case Basis

The court held that the BIA had misapplied Matter of A-B-, as well as past precedent, in concluding that the petitioner’s proposed social group comprised of “indigenous women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship” was not cognizable. (Diaz-Reynoso v. Barr, 8/7/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081430

 

CA9 Denies Qualified Immunity to Montana Judge and Sheriff’s Deputy over Undocumented Immigrant’s Courthouse Arrest

In an action alleging that an undocumented immigrant’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated when he was arrested in a Montana courthouse, the court affirmed the denial of qualified immunity to the defendants, a local judge and sheriff’s deputy. (Reynaga Hernandez v. Skinner, et al., 8/10/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081233

 

CA9 Remands Asylum Claim of Nicaraguan Petitioner Who Suffered Frequent and Severe Abuse by Domestic Partner

Granting the petition for review, the court held that substantial evidence did not support the BIA’s conclusion that petitioner had failed to establish the Nicaraguan government was unable or unwilling to protect her from persecution by her domestic partner. (Davila v. Barr, 8/7/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081431

 

CA9 Says “Obstruction of Justice” Under INA §101(a)(43)(S) Unambiguously Requires a Nexus to Ongoing or Pending Proceedings

Granting the petition for review, the court held that INA §101(a)(43)(S), which describes an aggravated felony offense relating to obstruction of justice, unambiguously requires a nexus to an ongoing or pending proceeding or investigation. (Valenzuela Gallardo v. Barr, 8/6/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081302

 

CA9 Holds That a Conviction for Criminal Stalking in California Is Categorically a CIMT

Denying the petition for review, the court held that the BIA did not err in concluding that the petitioner’s conviction under California Penal Code §646.9(a) for criminal stalking was categorically a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). (Orellana v. Barr, 7/28/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081037

 

CA9 Holds That Petitioner’s Oregon Conviction for Manufacture of a Controlled Substance Was an Aggravated Felony

The court held that Oregon Revised Statute §475.992(1)(a), which criminalizes the manufacture or delivery of a controlled substance, is divisible as between its “manufacture” and “delivery” terms, and that a conviction under that statute is an aggravated felony. (Dominguez v. Barr, 7/21/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081036

 

CA10 Finds Petitioner’s Colorado Drug Conviction Did Not Qualify as a Predicate for Removal

The court held that the Colorado statute under which the petitioner was convicted for possessing hydrocodone was broader than its federal counterpart, the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and that no categorical match existed between the state statute and the CSA. (Johnson v. Barr, 7/31/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081134

 

CA10 Finds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review BIA’s Discretionary Cancellation-of-Removal Hardship Decision

The court held that, under INA §242(a)(2)(B), it lacked jurisdiction over the petitioner’s claim that the BIA had misapplied its precedent in weighing the level of hardship that the petitioner’s U.S. citizen spouse would face upon his removal. (Galeano-Romero v. Barr, 8/4/20) AILA Doc. No. 20081432

 

USCIS Memo on Settlement Process for Historical Fingerprint Enrollment for Denaturalization Cases

USCIS released a memo in response to a FOIA request outlining the settlement process for Historical Fingerprint Enrollment cases as cases are prepared for denaturalization. Special thanks to Matthew Hoppock. AILA Doc. No. 20081433

 

ICE Issues Guidance on COVID-19

ICE updated its guidance on its response to the COVID-19 pandemic, providing information on how it screens new detainees. ICE notes that it tests all new detainees at ICE-owned facilities for COVID-19, houses all new detainees separately for 14 days after arrival, and monitors their symptoms. AILA Doc. No. 20031658

 

RESOURCES

 

 

EVENTS

 

Note: Check with organizers regarding cancellations/changes

 

ImmProf

 

Monday, August 17, 2020

Sunday, August 16, 2020

Saturday, August 15, 2020

Friday, August 14, 2020

Thursday, August 13, 2020

Wednesday, August 12, 2020

Tuesday, August 11, 2020

Monday, August 10, 2020

 

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

I think it’s interesting that, as Elizabeth reports, respondents still properly win at least some “unpublished” appeals to the BIA. (Practice hint, the amazing Ben Winograd, Esquire, keeps track of  all the BIA’s unpublished cases.  As pointed out by “The Asylumist” Jason Dzubow recently, that’s over 99% of the BIA’s total work product.) Yet, “winners” for respondents among published BIA precedents have come virtually extinct.

I can’t remember offhand the last time I saw a precedent decision where the respondent clearly prevailed that wasn’t then “certified” to the AG for reversal. Heck, the Trump AGs even have “certified” cases that DHS won, just to eradicate some non-dispositive finding that might have been helpful to future respondents.

What if we got rid of political interference in the “quasi-judicial” process by biased AGs? What if we had an expert BIA, well-versed in asylum, human rights, immigration, and constitutional law, that consistently treated respondents fairly on appeal and published the results to promote the granting of deserved relief before Immigration Judges and to instruct attorneys on how to prepare well-documented cases?

Due Process Forever! And, as always, many thanks to Elizabeth!

PWS

08-17-20

🛡⚔️⚖️ADVENTURES OF THE ROUND TABLE: Latest Amicus Brief To Supremes Weighs In On “Stop Time Rule” — Niz-Chávez v. Barr — Many Thanks to The Pro Bono Stars  @ Gibson Dunn!

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

Niz-Chavez Amicus Brief TO FILE

No. 19-863 IN THE

    _______________

AGUSTO NIZ-CHAVEZ,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

                   _______________

On Writ Of Certiorari

To The United States Court of Appeals For the Sixth Circuit _______________

BRIEF OF THIRTY-THREE FORMER IMMIGRATION JUDGES AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS

AS AMICI CURIAE

IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER _______________

RICHARD W. MARK

Counsel of Record

AMER S. AHMED

TIMOTHY SUN

DORAN J. SATANOVE

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 200 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10166 (212) 351-4000 rmark@gibsondunn.com

Counsel for Amici Curiae 

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE 

1

1

Amici curiae are thirty-three former immigration judges and members of the Board of Immigration Ap- peals (“BIA” or “Board”).2

Amici curiae have dedicated their careers to the immigration court system and to upholding the immi gration laws of the United States. Each is intimately familiar with the functioning of immigration courts and is invested in improving the fairness and effi- ciency of the United States immigration scheme. Amici curiae’s extensive experience adjudicating im- migration cases provides a unique perspective on the procedures and practicalities of immigration proceed- ings.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

The straightforward question this case presents is one of enormous practical significance: Must the ini- tial written notice served on noncitizens to commence their removal proceedings provide—in one docu- ment—the “time and place at which the proceedings will be held” (along with charges and other specified information) in order to satisfy the requirements of 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a), or does the statute allow the govern- ment to cobble together the required elements of a “notice to appear” from multiple documents, issued at different times, some containing misinformation, and

1 All parties have consented to the filing of this brief. Amici state that this brief was not authored in whole or in part by coun- sel for any party, and that no person or entity other than amici or their counsel made a monetary contribution intended to fund the preparation or submission of this brief.

2 The appendix provides a complete list of signatories.

 

2

none of which alone contains all of the statutorily re- quired information?

Reversing the Sixth Circuit and holding that § 1229(a)’s requirements must be included in a single document will greatly reduce the procedural and bu- reaucratic errors attendant in a two-step process that detrimentally impact thousands of noncitizens law- fully seeking to remain in this country.

I. For noncitizens applying for cancellation of re- moval, service of a valid “notice to appear” under § 1229(a) triggers the so-called “stop-time” rule, which terminates the period of continuous presence required for cancellation eligibility. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229b(d)(1), 1229b(a)(2), 1229b(b)(1)(A). Separately but relatedly, for noncitizens ordered removed in ab- sentia, whether that “severe” penalty, Pereira v. Ses- sions, 138 S. Ct. 2105, 2111 (2018), is proper depends on whether the notice served on the noncitizen satis- fied the requirements of §1229(a). 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(A). This Court’s decision will thus touch not only those like Petitioner who are seeking cancel- lation of removal, but also those who may not even have been provided sufficient notice to appear for their removal hearings—and potentially severely punished as a result.

II. The Sixth Circuit’s ruling approves a two-step notice process that involves: (i) the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) serving on a noncitizen a putative notice to appear lacking time-and-place in- formation (or, perhaps worse, that includes fake time- and-place information), and (ii) only after that notice to appear is filed and docketed with the immigration court, the immigration court separately sending a “no- tice of hearing” supplying the time-and-place infor- mation to the noncitizen.

3

Under this two-step process an initial notice lack- ing § 1229(a)’s time-and-place information languishes in a proverbial “No Man’s Land” until the notice is filed with an immigration court and entered into the court’s computer systems—a process that can take years. This delay increases the risk of procedural er- rors and lost filings, such as crucial Change of Address forms, which can result in noncitizens never receiving time-and-place information at all—potentially result- ing in wholly unjustified in absentia removal orders.

Sorting through those issues adds to immigration judges’ fact-finding burdens by requiring them to di- vert attention from the merits of a case to investigate collateral issues like whether time-and-place infor- mation was provided in a second document; whether that document was properly served; and whether a fil- ing like a Change of Address form was submitted but ultimately lost in “No Man’s Land.” When coupled with the pressure to complete cases—even if it means churning out in absentia removal orders without fully considering whether the noncitizen received adequate time-and-place notice—the result may be an increase in unwarranted removal orders.

These problems would be ameliorated if the gov- ernment simply provided the actual time-and-place information in a single document as required by § 1229(a).

III. Requiring DHS to work with the Executive Office of Immigration Review (“EOIR”) to obtain time- and-place information before serving a notice to ap- pear—and including such information in that docu- ment, as § 1229(a) and Pereira require—is practical and within the government’s capabilities.

4

A single-step notice process, consistent with this Court’s ruling in Pereira, furthers the due process ax- iom that a party charged to defend against a legal pro- ceeding must receive notice of the time and place of the proceeding and an opportunity to be heard.

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

Read the complete brief, with better formatting, at the link!

Of course we couldn’t have done this without the amazing talent and assistance of Amer S. Ahmed and the rest of the “Pro Bono All-Star Team” 🎖🏆 @ Gibson Dunn! Just another example of the essential contribution of pro bono lawyers to literally saving our legal system that has been featured on “Courtside” this week!

Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-14-20

 😇🌞🗽⚖️👍🏼“A LIGHT IN THE FOREST” — Michelle Mendez @ CLINIC Shows How Good Pro Bono Lawyering Saves Lives Even When The System Is Rigged Against Justice For Immigrants!

Michelle Mendez
Michelle Mendez
Defending Vulnerable Populations Director
Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (“CLINIC”)

Subject: CLINIC BIA Pro Bono Project Recent Victories

 

Friends,

 

BIA and federal circuit court appeals often feel like an uphill battle, a true David and Goliath fight. It can be particularly discouraging right now, during an isolating pandemic, when DHS and DOJ issue new regulations and the BIA and AG publish opinions almost weekly with the purpose of making it more difficult for noncitizens to win their cases. However, CLINIC’s BIA Pro Bono Project continues to fight back and perform miracles—defeating Goliath—thanks to BIA Pro Bono Project Manager Rachel Naggar, BIA Pro Bono Project Legal Specialist Brenda Hernandez, and our many dedicated attorney volunteers. Rachel and Brenda shared with me the project’s awe-inspiring stories of success from this summer and the volunteers who made these victories possible. In turn, I share these success stories with you to offer inspiration to keep fighting for your clients while the Trump administration escalates its attacks on immigrant communities.

 

  • The BIA remanded the case of a Haitian asylum seeker on numerous grounds, including that the IJ did not apply the proper framework for assessing firm resettlement, the IJ mixed up the respondent’s political party when assessing his claim for withholding of removal, and the IJ did not meaningfully consider the respondent’s risk of future persecution. Thank you to Michael Ward of Alston&Bird!
  • The BIA overturned the IJ’s adverse credibility finding against an asylum seeker from Burkina Faso. The BIA also found that the IJ erred in concluding there was no nexus between the harm the respondent suffered and his political opinion, including that the prosecution he endured was actually pretext for persecution. Thank you to Gregory Proctor, Marjorie Sheldon, and Christian Roccotagliata of Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel!
  • The BIA granted asylum to a Cuban refugee. Contrary to the IJ, the BIA found that the harm suffered by the respondent did cumulatively rise to the level of past persecution and he did have a well-founded fear of persecution. Thank you to Austin Manes and Aaron Frankel of Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel!
  • The BIA remanded the case of a Cuban asylum seeker because the IJ failed to consider the evidence of past economic persecution along with the physical harm suffered. The BIA also reminded the IJ that where the persecution is committed by the government, it is presumed that internal relocation is not reasonable, and the burden shifts to DHS to demonstrate that it would be reasonable in this case. Thank you to Dean Galaro of Perkins Coie!
  • The BIA reopened the case of a Cuban asylum seeker because he had new evidence of harm and threats against his family that occurred after his final hearing with the immigration judge. Thank you to Astrid Ackerman and Aaron Webman of Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel!
  • The Ninth Circuit granted the petition for review of a Ghanaian asylum seeker, overturning the IJ’s negative credibility finding and concluding that the Board had failed to adequately consider the country conditions evidence when it denied CAT relief. You can read the full decision here. Thank you to Kari Hong of Boston College Law School!
  • The Third Circuit, in a published decision, granted a Honduran asylum seeker’s petition for review, finding that the IJ and BIA erred in analyzing whether the respondent had suffered past persecution. The Court also found that the IJ failed to conduct the proper analysis regarding the need for evidence in an application for CAT protection. You can read the full decision here. Thank you to Aaron Rabinowitz and Gary Levin of Baker & Hostetler!
  • The Sixth Circuit, in a published decision, granted a Russian asylum seeker’s petition for review, finding that the IJ and BIA erred in concluding that the respondent was not persecuted on account of his political opinions and that his indictment for peacefully protesting under Russian law was a pretext for persecution. You can read the full decision here. Thank you to Brenna Duncan and Andrew Caridas of Perkins Coie!
  • DHS withdrew its appeal of a grant of asylum from Mexico to a Cuban national. DHS conceded to the IJ that the respondent was eligible for asylum from Mexico, but not Cuba because of the Third Country Transit Bar. DHS changed its mind and filed an appeal, which was withdrawn after pro bono counsel filed his brief. Thank you to James Montana of The Law Office of James Montana!
  • The BIA dismissed an appeal by the Department of Homeland Security and upheld a Cuban woman’s grant of asylum. The Board found that the IJ was correct in deeming the respondent eligible for asylum and not subject to the Third Country Transit Bar. Thank you to Aaron Rabinowitz and Jeffrey Lyons of Baker & Hostetler!
  • ICE released a Venezuelan asylum seeker from detention to reunite with her spouse, after tremendous advocacy efforts by her pro bono attorney. Thank you to David Gottlieb!
  • The Ninth Circuit remanded the case of a Honduran victim of domestic violence, at the request of the Department of Justice. The Court ordered the BIA to reconsider whether the respondent had demonstrated that the Honduran government acquiesced in her persecution, whether the respondent is part of a viable particular social group, whether it would have been futile for her to report the harm to local authorities, and whether internal relocation would be reasonable. Thank you to Alicia Chen!
  • A victim of human rights violations by the notorious Eritrean military was granted withholding of removal, after the BIA overturned the IJ’s adverse credibility finding and found that the IJ failed to consider that the country conditions evidence corroborated the respondent’s claim. Thank you to Jonaki Singh and Susan Jacquemot of Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel!
  • The Ninth Circuit remanded the case of an asylum seeker from Mexico, at the request of the Department of Justice. The Court ordered the BIA to reconsider whether the respondent had been persecuted and sexually assaulted on account of her sexual orientation, and whether the government of Mexico could adequately protect her from future harm. Thank you to Tim Patton of the Appellate Immigration Project!
  • The Fourth Circuit granted the petition for review holding that a conviction under VA 18.2-280(A) is not a removable firearms offense, a result that would not have been possible had Mr. Gordon not continued to fight his case for so many years even despite being deported. You can read the decision here. Thank you to the CAIR Coalition and Ted Howard at Wiley Rein! Thank you also to the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild for the amicus support!
  • Jose came to the United States in 1985 to live with his father as a permanent resident. He built a life in the United States, becoming a father himself. After a run in with the law, he was placed in removal proceedings and was detained for 19 months. In a 2-1 decision, the Third Circuit found that under the unique circumstances of this case, Jose’s father was deprived of the equal protection of the laws. Jose is a United States citizen, the court declared, and has been since 1985. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Sessions v. Morales-Santana, Jose’s case was the first to benefit from this Supreme Court decision. You can read the full decision here. The government petitioned for rehearing, but the full Third Circuit declined to intervene. Ultimately, the government declined to ask the Supreme Court to review the case. For the better part of the last decade, Jose’s life has been filled with uncertainty and stress, but not anymore, which is very important as Jose is expecting his first grandchild. A huge thank you to Nick Curcio who has represented Jose for 7 years!

 

In its 19+ years of operation, the Project has reviewed more than 7,200 cases, pairing attorneys and law school clinics with vulnerable asylum seekers and long-time lawful permanent residents. If you are interested in representing a case through CLINIC’s BIA Pro Bono Project, please complete our volunteer form. If you prefer to show your support for the BIA Pro Bono Project via a monetary donation, please designate “BIA Pro Bono Project” in the “In honor of” field of our donations page.

 

Gratefully and in solidarity,

 

Michelle N. Mendez (she/her/ella/elle)

Director, Defending Vulnerable Populations Program

Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC)

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

Thanks Michelle, my friend, colleague, and courageous leader of the NDPA.  What a timely, wonderful, practical, “real life” illustration of Jason “The Asylumist” Dzubow’s “praise and call to action for pro bono” that I republished earlier this week! https://immigrationcourtside.com/2020/08/11/lifesaving-101-for-the-ndpa-begins-with-pro-bono-never-has-the-need-been-greater-pro-bonos-finest-hour-in-americas-time-of-darkness-cruelty-inhumanity/

Here’s what our colleague Judge Jeffrey Chase has to say about Michelle and CLINIC:

No surprise, Michelle.  CLINIC is responsible for so much good case law.  And the non-CLINIC successful attorneys probably used CLINIC training or practice advisories.  Congrats to you and all of your outstanding attorneys and support staff, and thanks for all you do!

Even in times of our greatest national darkness and misery, there are plenty of lives that can be saved! Contrary to the “Dred Scottification” — dehumanization of persons in our country — unconscionably pushed by the regime and enabled by many public officials and courts that “should know better,” every person’s life is important!

And, despite the conscious misinterpretation and misapplication of the Fifth Amendment by far too many of those charged with upholding it, every person in the U.S., regardless of race or status, is entitled to due process, fundamental fairness, and to be treated with human dignity.

Think of how much progress we could make if we didn’t have to keep re-litigating all the same issues over and over again, often with differing results! 

What if the “precedents” concentrated on those cases that could be granted, rather than almost exclusively focusing on “roadmaps to denial?” 

What if we promoted and supported great pro bono representation, rather than inhibiting and discouraging it? 

What if meritorious cases were moved to the “head of the line” instead of continuously being “shuffled off to Buffalo” by “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” (“ADR”) thereby languishing in the mindlessly expanding backlog? 

What if Federal Judges at all levels were the “best and the brightest” — selected from among those with demonstrated expertise in immigration, asylum and human rights and impeccable reputations for due process, fundamental fairness, and humanity, rather than being selected for “go along to get along” reputations or allegiance to perverse political ideologies that undermine equal justice for all?

What if our Immigration Court system were administered independently and professionally, rather than as a biased and weaponized tool of DHS enforcement and White Nationalist politicos?

What if our Justice System worked cooperatively with folks like Michelle, Jason, Judge Ashley Tabaddor, and many others with good, creative, practical ideas for institutionalizing “best practices” leading to to “due process with efficiency?”

What if we fairly implemented our refugee, asylum, and protection legal framework to “protect rather than reject?”

What if we consistently treated our fellow beings as humans, rather than as “less than human?”

What if we viewed immigration for what it really is: the foundation of our nation and a continuing source of great strength, pride, and optimism for our country of immigrants, rather than pretending that we live on an island and must “wall off” the rest of the world?

This November, vote like your life and the future of our nation depend on it! Because they do!

PWS

08-14-20

LIFESAVING 101 FOR THE NDPA BEGINS WITH PRO BONO! – Never Has The Need Been Greater – Pro Bono’s Finest Hour In America’s Time Of Darkness, Cruelty, & Inhumanity! – From “The Asylumist” Jason Dzubow!

Jason Dzubow
Jason Dzubow
The Asylumist

Here’s the link:

https://www.asylumist.com/2020/08/11/asylum-seekers-need-pro-bono-lawyers-now-more-than-ever/

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

Yes, never has pro bono been more important than it is now!

This is a regime of White Nationalist cowards. Part of their strategy for “Dred Scottification” and dehumanization of “the other” is to pick on asylum seekers and immigrants first, because they are the “easy marks” often stuck in a system they have no realistic chance of navigating with no representation. Then extend the “dehumanization” and abrogation of due process and equal protection to other categories of “the other:” Hispanics, Blacks, LGBTQ, women, Muslims, Asians, etc. until basically only GOP White Christian straight males and their “female fellow travelers” have any individual rights that will be protected by the Federal Courts.

Think we’re not moving in that direction? Check out Roberts’s “head in the sand” claim that picking on Dreamers had nothing to do with racism directed at Hispanics. Or the Supremes’ majority’s totally dishonest approach to voting rights of people of color: “Yes, we see the GOP ‘fix is on’ to disenfranchise you. But, we’re only the Supremes, so we aren’t going to do anything to protect your Constitutional right to vote. You’ll have to solve it politically at the same time you are being disenfranchised by a minority of white GOP politicos and GOP voters with our help. We help the ‘perps in power,’ not their ‘victims of color.’”

So totally emboldened is Trump by the Supremes’ complicity in racism that he is hatching plans to bar U.S. citizens and LPRs from entering over the Southern Border if they are “suspected of having COVID” while he lets COVID run wild in the U.S. and actively undermines science and rational attempts to control the pandemic. Want to bet on how many of those USCs and LPRs barred at the border will be White and how many will be Hispanic Americans? But, Roberts will “just say OK” because “lots of Hispanic Americans come over the Southern Border.”

Roberts once got all huffy and self-righteous when dissenting colleagues correctly  accused him of reviving discredited precedents that supported internment of Japanese Americans. He even went through the motions of supposedly overruling that leading case. But, then he basically followed its racist and invidious doctrines by essentially substituting Muslims, Hispanics, asylum seekers, refugees, and immigrants for Japanese Americans. Dehumanization is alive and well at the Supremes today. The targets might change; but the ugliness and unlawfulness doesn’t.

One great way to fight back against these racist attacks by Trump is by insuring that unrepresented or underrepresented migrants are no longer the “low hanging fruit” of racist intimidation and unequal treatment before the law. Fill the Federal Courts with litigation and force complicit Federal Judges, from Immigration Judges all the way up to and including the Supremes, to look at the face at their own ugly racist enabling and human rights denying misfeasance in office every day. Make a public record to insure that their kids, grandkids, and all future generations know just how spinelessly their ancestors performed when confronted with clear, grotesque, and deadly violations of human rights and human dignity. How when the “chips were down” for democracy and human decency, they were MIA!

Right now, we’re in the long overdue process of tearing down the statutes of past racists like Chief Justice Roger Taney of “Dred Scott infamy.” But, we must insure that the statutes of the Federal Judges and other public officials who are enabling and promoting modern-day “Dred Scottification” never get built in the first place.

Remember my “Five Cs” – Constantly Confront Complicit Courts for Change!

Due Process Forever! And, of course, thanks every day to the legions of pro bono fighters among the ranks of our “New Due Process Army” who courageously champion the cause of the most vulnerable among us, thereby protecting all of our individual rights, at a time of great and disturbing national cowardice and unparalleled corruption and incompetence among the GOP “governing” class and their enablers and apologists.

PWS

08-11-20

THE GIBSON REPORT 08-03-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

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

THE GIBSON REPORT 08-03-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

COVID-19

Note: Policies are rapidly changing, so please verify the latest policies on the relevant government websites and with colleagues on listservs as best you can.

 

New

  • Opening dates for some non-detained courts: Hearings in non-detained cases at courts without an announced date are postponed through, and including, August 21, 2020.
  • USCIS Visitor Policy (If requesting telephonic appearance of counsel at an interview, don’t forget to send the client to the interview with a signed G-28 that contains the number where USCIS should call you.)

 

Closures

 

Guidance:

 

TOP NEWS

 

The Trump Administration Will Start Charging Immigrants Fees For Applying For Asylum

Buzzfeed: The US now joins the ranks of Iran, Fiji, and Australia in charging a fee. In the US, there will be a $50 charge on asylum applications starting in October…The asylum fee is just one of many changes included in the rule issued by USCIS, which is primarily funded by immigrants’ applications, such as filing for a green card or work permit. The agency is required to review its fee structure every two years. The final rule will make it so immigrants seeking to naturalize and applying to become US citizens will have to pay upwards of $1,170, a jump from $640. See also Changes to USCIS Fee Schedule; USCIS Pleads for Money to Avoid Furloughs, Democrats Float Making the Funds Contingent on Policy Changes.

 

Trump administration won’t accept new DACA applications

AP: The Trump administration said Tuesday that it will reject new applications and shorten renewal periods for an Obama-era program that shields young people from deportation, taking a defiant stance after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to let it be scrapped completely.

 

DOJ loses bid to nix union for immigration judges

Reuters: A Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) official on Friday rejected the Trump administration’s bid to dissolve a union that represents U.S. immigration judges, saying the judges are not “management officials” who are barred from joining unions.

 

Homeland Security seized $2 billion from travelers, but most were never charged with a crime, report says

WaPo: Federal law allows CBP and other agencies to take cash from travelers as a way to combat drug trafficking and other criminal enterprises, but the new report by the Institute for Justice found nearly 70 percent of such cases are like Nwaorie’s — no arrest accompanies a seizure.

 

Acting ICE chief announces retirement following clashes with Trump officials

Politico: White House officials had accused Albence of favoring humanitarian concerns about the treatment of immigrants over the chance to take more aggressive action.

 

Border Patrol Launches Militarized Raid Of Borderlands Humanitarian Aid Camp

Intercept: For the second time in two years, Border Patrol launched a raid against No More Deaths within days of the group releasing embarrassing information about the agency.

 

Pardoned By Cuomo But Detained By ICE, Bronx Immigrant Marks Three Years In ICE Detention

Gothamist: In an extraordinary move six months ago, Governor Andrew Cuomo pardoned the 26-year-old Gambian immigrant from the Bronx for the one adult criminal conviction on his record — for robbing two gold chains from a female neighbor’s neck, which he said he didn’t do. His attorneys and the legion of activists who are supporting him thought that would pave the way for authorities to release him. That hasn’t happened.

 

Trump To Limit Federal Contractors’ Use Of Foreign Labor

Law 360: President Donald Trump will sign an executive order Monday that will require federal agencies to prioritize U.S. citizens and nationals for contractor roles, expanding on previous orders limiting immigration from June and April.

 

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

 

District Court Issues Nationwide Injunction on Both DOS and DHS Public Charge Regulations Due to COVID-19

A district judge issued a nationwide injunction on both the DOS and DHS public charge rules due to COVID-19. (Make the Road New York, et al., v. DHS, 7/29/20) AILA Doc. No. 20072935

 

Attorney General Rules on Categorical Approach to Determining Aggravated Felonies

Ruling on the application of the categorical approach to determining aggravated felonies and that respondent’s conviction for grand larceny in the second degree in NY was an aggravated felony, the AG vacated BIA’s decision in Matter of Reyes. Matter of Reyes, 28 I&N Dec. 52 (A.G. 2020) AILA Doc. No. 20073131

 

USCIS Newark Asylum Office to Open Manhattan Branch

The Newark Asylum Office is adding a Manhattan branch which will open for interviews on Aug. 17, 2020…The Manhattan branch will be located in the federal building at 201 Varick Street in lower Manhattan. The main asylum office, currently located in Lyndhurst, N.J., has been closed to the public due to recent, ongoing facility issues.

 

Federal Judge Shuts Down Law Groups’ Intervention in Long-Standing Immigration Case

Courthouse News: A California federal judge denied a motion from nonprofit legal service providers to intervene in a decades-old case that determines the treatment and release of immigration children held by the United States.

 

AILA’s New Jersey Chapter Seek to Enjoin Newark Immigration Court from Compelling In-Person Proceedings

The AILA New Jersey Chapter filed a complaint in district court seeking to enjoin the Newark Immigration Court from forcing immigration attorneys to appear for in-person proceedings during the COVID-19 pandemic. (AILA New Jersey Chapter v. EOIR, 7/31/20) AILA Doc. No. 20080301

 

Citizenship requirements a sticking point in CARES Act and COVID Relief Funding

ImmProf: A federal judge for the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts issued a preliminary injunction Friday ordering that the Department of Education could not deny funding authorized by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act to a Bunker Hill Community College student based on her immigration status.

 

USCIS and EOIR Proposed Rule on Pandemic-Related Security Bars to Asylum and Withholding of Removal

USCIS and EOIR proposed rule allowing DHS and DOJ to consider “emergency public health concerns based on communicable disease due to potential international threats from the spread of pandemics” when determining whether an individual is ineligible for asylum or withholding of removal on security grounds. AILA Doc. No. 20070831

 

USCIS Provides Information on Injunction of the Public Charge Grounds Final Rule

USCIS provided information on how it plans to adjudicate applications or petitions in light of the July 29, 2020, injunction from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York which enjoins the government from enforcing USCIS’s Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds Final Rule. AILA Doc. No. 20073140

 

DHS Reissues Privacy Impact Assessment for CBP and ICE DNA Collection

DHS updated a previously issued PIA to provide notice to the public of biometric DNA collection from individuals detained by ICE and CBP and the associated privacy risks. DHS reissued the PIA to note that CBP Office of Field Operations is expanding the minimum age for DNA collection from 18 to 14. AILA Doc. No. 20072701

 

ICE Final Rule on Changes Applicable to Surety Bond Companies

ICE final rule which requires surety companies seeking to overcome a bond breach determination to exhaust administrative remedies, and which sets forth “for cause” standards so that ICE may decline bonds from companies that do not cure their deficient performance. (85 FR 45968, 7/31/20) AILA Doc. No. 20073134

 

USCIS Announces Special Instructions for Liberian Refugee Immigration Fairness Program

USCIS announced that it has added special instructions regarding eligibility requirements, filing, and adjudication of adjustment of status applications based on the Liberian Refugee Immigration Fairness provision in the NDAA. Individuals should read these special instructions before applying. AILA Doc. No. 20042034

 

RESOURCES

 

 

EVENTS

 

Note: Check with organizers regarding cancellations/changes

 

ImmProf

 

Monday, August 3, 2020

Sunday, August 2, 2020

Saturday, August 1, 2020

Friday, July 31, 2020

Thursday, July 30, 2020

Wednesday, July 29, 2020

Tuesday, July 28, 2020

Monday, July 27, 2020

 

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

Thanks, Elizabeth.

PWS

08-04-20

🛡⚔️⚖️🗽 ROUND TABLE ASSISTS FIGHT AGAINST “AMERICA’S STAR CHAMBERS” — Here’s Our Amicus Brief In Las Americas v. Trump! — With Thanks To Our Pro Bono Friends STOLL STOLL BERNE LOKTING & SHLACHTER P.C. in Portland, OR!

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

Excerpt:

The immigration court system lacks independence. An agency within the Department of Justice, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) houses the immigration court system, which consists of trial-level immigration courts and a single appellate tribunal known as the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Immigration judges, including appellate immigration judges, are viewed by EOIR “management” not as judges, but as Department of Justice attorneys who serve at the pleasure and direction of the Nation’s prosecutor-in-chief, the Attorney General.

As former immigration judges, we offer the Court our experience and urge that corrective action is necessary to ensure that immigration judges are permitted to function as impartial adjudicators, as required under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The INA and its implementing regulations set forth procedures for the “timely, impartial, and consistent” resolution of immigration proceedings. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1103, 1230; 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(1) (charging the Board with appellate review authority to “resolve the questions before it in a manner that is timely, impartial, and consistent with the [INA] and regulations”) (emphasis added); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.10(b) (similarly requiring “immigration judges . . . to resolve the questions before them in a timely and impartial manner”) (emphasis added).

Although housed inside an enforcement agency and led by the Nation’s chief prosecutor, immigration judges must act neutrally to protect and adjudicate the important rights at stake in immigration cases and check executive overreach in the enforcement of federal immigration law. Applying a detached and learned interpretation of those laws, judges must correct overzealous bureaucrats and policy makers when they overstep the bounds of reasonable interpretation and the requirements of due process.

Here’s the full brief:

Las Americas Amicus (full case)

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

As I often say, it’s an honor to be a part of this group with so many of my wonderful colleagues. It’s also an honor to be able to assist so many wonderful “divisions and brigades” of the New Due Process Army, like the SPLC and Immigration Law Lab.

Here’s another thought I often express: What if all of this talent, creativity, teamwork, expertise, and energy were devoted to fixing our broken Immigration Court System rather than constantly fighting to end gross abuses that should not be happening? There is a “systemic cost” to “maliciously incompetent” administration and the White Nationalist agenda promoted by the Trump kakistocracy!

Knightess
Knightess of the Round Table

Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-04-20

😎👍🏼🗽⚖️GOOD NEWS CORNER: Hofstra Law Clinic Wins Salvadoran Gang PSG Asylum Case! — There Are “Models For Excellent Judging” Out There! Why Do We Tolerate A White Nationalist Kakistocracy That Maliciously Undermines Them?

 

Hello,

 

I want to share some good news: my Deportation Defense Clinic at the Hofstra Law Clinic won an asylum case on the PSG of “U.S. law enforcement labeled gang members” before Judge Poczter at 290 Broadway for a client falsely accused of gang allegations. See the redacted decision attached. We’re waiting to see if DHS appeals within these next two weeks and are prepared to continue the fight if necessary.

Quote on Page 13:

“Respondent’s social group, ‘U.S. law enforcement labeled gang members’ is cognizable, in that its members share an immutable characteristic that is socially distinct within Salvadorian society and defined with sufficient particularity.”

 

I’m willing to share the redacted TOE and brief with those interested.

 

Deep gratitude is owed to CLINIC/NITA, Michelle Mendez, Vickie Neilson, and folks at Hofstra including Lauris Wren, law graduates Lorena Paulino and Trishshawn Raffington, and many others.

 

Dr. Tom Boerman and I are working on a law review article on this topic, and I hope this new resource will be helpful to others defending clients from false gang allegations. More to follow soon.

 

Best,

Alex Holtzman

Director of the Deportation Defense Clinic

Hofstra Law Clinic

Redacted_IJ Decision_Asylum grant for false gang alleg PSG

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

So, even in the time of time of extreme White Nationalist restrictionism in Government, there are still plenty of “winnable” asylum cases out there if individuals: 1) get access to the hearing process; 2) have access to competent lawyers; 3) get time to prepare and document cases; and 4) have a fair and impartial Immigration Judge with knowledge of asylum law. A fair and reasonable INS Assistant Chief Counsel is also an important factor.

How many valid cases like this are being turned back at our borders under the regime’s “fake COVID-19” rules with no hearings at all? How many are being summarily deported without fair credible fear interviews or an opportunity for impartial judicial review as a result of the Supremes’ latest expedited removal constitutional abomination?

Interestingly, this case was so well prepared and documented that ICE and the Clinic stipulated as to the testimony and merely submitted that record to Judge Poczter for a legal analysis and decision. Shows that without political interference, judges and parties can work together to facilitate a fair and timely resolution of cases without trampling on due process. 

It’s simply a “crime against humanity” that the Immigration Court system is run by bigoted anti-asylum zealots with no interest in due process or fundamental fairness.

So, what if decisions like Judge Poczter’s (a former BIA Attorney Advisor during my tenure) were the precedents, instead of deny, deny, deny? What if “best practices” were valued? What if achieving correct results in accordance with due process were the object, rather than increasing the number of asylum denials to fit a false narrative? What if asylum law were properly applied to protect, rather than reject?

This could be a system that would do justice and make America  proud. But, it’s not going to happen without an independent, merit-based judiciary and an Administration that works to achieve equal justice for all, rather than undermining it at every step.

Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-15-20

🎓🗽⚖️👍🏼ATTENTION NDPA: POSITIONS AVAILABLE FOR PRACTICE-ORIENTED IMMIGRATION EXPERTS & PROSPECTIVE IMMIGRATION TEACHERS — Professor Michele Pistone @ Villanova Is Recruiting Paid Adjuncts For Her Amazing VIISTA Program!

Professor Michele Pistone
Professor Michele Pistone
Villanova Law

Hi Judge Schmidt,

Can you share the below with your networks:

This fall, I am launching a new online certificate program at Villanova University to train immigrant advocates.  The program is aimed at people who are passionate about immigrant justice but are not interested in pursuing a law degree at the moment, such as recent college grads, people seeking an encore career, retirees, and the many who currently work with migrants and want to understand more about the immigration laws that impact them.  It is also attractive to students seeking to take a gap year or two between college and law school or high school and college.

The program is offered entirely online and is asynchronous, allowing students to work at their own pace and at times that are most convenient for them.  I piloted the curriculum during last academic year and the students loved it.  It launches full time in August, and will subsequently be offered each semester, so students can start in August, January, and May.

I reach out to you because I am now seeking adjunct professors to help teach the course.  Adjunct Professors will work with me to teach cohorts of students as they move through the 3-Module curriculum.  Module 1 focuses on how to work effectively with immigrants.  Module 2 is designed to teach the immigration law and policy needed for graduates to apply to become partially accredited representatives.  Module 3 has more law, and a lot of trial advocacy for those who want to apply for full DOJ accreditation.  Each Module is comprised of 2×7-week sessions and students report that they have worked between 10-15 hours/week on the course materials.  As an adjunct professor, you will provide feedback weekly on student work product, conduct live office hours with students and work to build engagement and community among the students in your cohort.  Tuition for each Module is $1270, it is $3810 for the entire 3-Module certificate program.

Here is a link to the job posting:

https://jobs.villanova.edu/postings/18505

For more information on VIISTA, here is a link, immigrantadvocate.villanova.edu

Please reach out if you have any questions.

Also, please note that scholarships are being offered through the Augustinian Defenders of the Rights of the Poor to select students who are sponsored to take VIISTA by DOJ recognized organizations.  For more information on the scholarships, visit this page, https://www.rightsofthepoor.org/viista-scholarship-program

My best,

Michele Pistone

Michele

Michele R. Pistone

Professor of Law

Villanova University, Charles Widger School of Law

Director, Clinic for Asylum, Refugee & Emigrant Services (CARES)

Founder, VIISTA Villanova Interdisciplinary Immigration Studies Training for Advocates

Co-Managing Editor, Journal on Migration and Human Security

Adjunct Fellow, Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation

610-519-5286

@profpistone

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

What an fantastic opportunity to get teaching experience, work on a “cutting edge” program with my good friend and colleague Michele, one of the best legal minds in America, and to make a difference by improving the delivery of justice in America, while being paid a stipend!

A “perfect fit” for members of the New Due Process Army (“NDPA”).

Due Process Forever!🗽👍🏼⚖️

PWS

07-10-20

THE GIBSON REPORT — 07-06-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

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

COVID-19

Note: Policies are rapidly changing, so please verify the latest policies on the relevant government websites and with colleagues on listservs as best you can.

New

Closures

Guidance:

 

TOP NEWS

 

A Top Immigration Court Official Called For Impartiality In A Memo He Sent As He Resigned

BuzzFeed: The Trump administration selected Tracy Short, previously the lead ICE prosecutor, for the chief immigration judge role. ICE prosecutors often take up roles as immigration judges, but the selection of Short, formerly ICE’s principal legal adviser, left some claiming the move would undercut the appearance of neutrality at the court. Christopher Santoro, the acting chief immigration judge, appeared to signal that in his message to court employees announcing his resignation.

 

New Trump immigration policy would disqualify asylum for people from countries with spreading disease

WaPo: The Trump administration is preparing broad new immigration restrictions that would deny humanitarian refuge to anyone from a country with a disease outbreak, deeming those asylum seekers to be a danger to public safety.

 

The NYPD’s Long History of Targeting Black Immigrants

DocumentedNY: Despite making up only 7.2 percent of the noncitizen population in the US, more than 20 percent of people facing deportation on criminal grounds are Black.

 

The Immigration System Is Set To Come To A Near Halt, And No One Is Paying Attention

BuzzFeed: If Congress does not provide US Citizenship and Immigration Services with emergency funding before Aug. 3, the employees, who make up more than 60% of all staffers, will be furloughed for up to three months due to the budget crisis…While the reasons for the funding shortage are debated — agency officials cite a massive decline in immigration applications due to the pandemic, while immigrant advocates and experts argue that the Trump administration’s policies have played a part in the budget issues — the impact to the immigration system is not.

 

The Shadow Court Cementing Trump’s Immigration Policy

The Nation: The Board of Immigration Appeals, once an impartial appellate court, has become a new front in the Trump administration’s war against migrants.

 

USCIS Announces July Naturalization Drive Before Furloughs

Law360: To clear its backlog before the bulk of its workforce is sent home, the agency must naturalize another 45,500 new Americans this month.

 

Failing Our Liberian Neighbors: Eligibility and Application Rates Under Liberian Refugee Immigration Fairness

CLINIC: The report concludes that in light of the large number of potential applicants, USCIS’ failure to successfully adjudicate and approve a single application four months into the program, and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, Congress should extend the December 20, 2020, deadline for at least an additional year to ensure that all eligible Liberians are able to apply for relief.

 

Inspector General Report Overlooks Serious Medical Care Issues Within Border Patrol Custody

AIC: While the report critiques the agency for not meeting its own standards, it also allows CBP to avoid meaningful accountability for numerous failures in meeting the health needs of those detained.

 

How Biden Plans to Undo Trump’s Nativist Agenda

Slate: In a little-noticed announcement, the former vice president committed to a more ambitious refugee policy than existed under Obama.

 

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

 

TVPRA Victory in Ramirez v. ICE

NIJC: A federal court has ruled that the failure of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to consider less restrictive settings before transferring unaccompanied immigrant youth to ICE detention on their 18th birthdays violates U.S. immigration laws.

 

District Court Vacates Third-Country Transit Ban, Effective Immediately

A federal judge found the government unlawfully promulgated the 2019 interim final rule that categorically disqualified individuals from receiving asylum unless they sought protection in another country before entering the southern border. (CAIR Coalition et al., v. Trump et al., 6/30/20) AILA Doc. No. 20070104

 

Immigration judges union suing Justice Dept. over policy restricting public speaking

The Hill: The Knight First Amendment Institute, a legal group at Columbia University, filed a lawsuit on Wednesday in federal court on behalf of the National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ). The suit alleges that the speech restrictions against immigration judges amount to violations of the First and Fifth Amendments and asks the court to impose a preliminary injunction blocking the policy.

 

EOIR Director Rules Amicus Curiae Cannot Seek Further Action Once Decision Has Been Rendered in Recognition and Accreditation Proceedings

The EOIR Director ruled that an amicus curiae is not a party in recognition and accreditation proceedings and has no authority to seek further action following the conclusion of an administrative review. Matter of Bay Area Legal Services, Inc., Applicant, 28 I&N Dec. 16 (DIR 2020) AILA Doc. No. 20070208

 

CA4 Upholds Asylum Denial to Salvadoran Who Feared Persecution by His Brother’s Murderers

The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that the attackers who threatened the petitioner were motivated by a desire to prevent him from reporting his brother’s murder to the police, and not by the petitioner’s family ties. (Cedillos-Cedillos v. Barr, 6/26/20) AILA Doc. No. 20070205

 

CA6 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen Where BIA Found Petitioner Had Failed to Overcome Presumption of Receipt of Mailed Notices

Where the evidence was conflicting, the court held that a reasonable adjudicator could conclude that the petitioner had failed to overcome the presumption that he had received notices of his hearing that were mailed to his aunt and uncle’s address. (Valadez-Lara v. Barr, 6/26/20) AILA Doc. No. 20070691

 

CA7 Rejects Castro-Tum and Holds That IJs Are Not Precluded from Administratively Closing Cases When Appropriate

Granting petition for review, the court rejected Matter of Castro-Tum’s conclusion that administrative closure is not within an IJ’s authority to take “any action” appropriate and necessary for the disposition of cases pursuant to 8 CFR §1003.10(b). (Meza Morales v. Barr, 6/26/20) AILA Doc. No. 20070207

 

CA8 Finds BIA Did Not Err in Denying CAT Relief to HIV-Positive Member of the Begedi Clan in Somalia

The court upheld the BIA’s denial of petitioner’s application for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), finding that the IJ had clearly erred in forecasting that petitioner would more likely than not be tortured if returned to Somalia. (Abdi Omar v. Barr, 6/26/20) AILA Doc. No. 20070692

 

CA9 Affirms District Court’s Grant of a Preliminary Injunction Against Third Country Transit Ban

The court upheld a lower court’s injunction preventing the implementation of DHS/DOJ joint interim final rule that categorically denies asylum to individuals arriving at the U.S./Mexico border. (East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, et al. v. Barr, et al., 7/6/20) AILA Doc. No. 20070636

RESOURCES

EVENTS

 

Note: Check with organizers regarding cancellations/changes

 

ImmProf

 

Monday, July 6, 2020

Sunday, July 5, 2020

Saturday, July 4, 2020

Friday, July 3, 2020

Thursday, July 2, 2020

Wednesday, July 1, 2020

Tuesday, June 30, 2020

Monday, June 29, 2020

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

Thanks for keeping us informed, Elizabeth!

PWS

07-08-20

🤡☹️A COURT W/O FRIENDS (THAT ISN’T A “COURT” AT ALL): EOIR Director Adopts Amicus’s Suggested Clarification, Then Shoots Messenger — Matter of Bay Area Legal Services, Inc. (“Bay Area II”)

Michelle Mendez
Michelle Mendez
Defending Vulnerable Populations Director
Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (“CLINIC”)
EYORE
“Eyore In Distress”
Once A Symbol of Fairness, Due Process, & Best Practices, Now Gone “Belly Up”

Michelle Mendez responds for CLINIC to McHenry’s latest decision in an e-mail to Dan Kowalski at LexisNexis Immigration Community:

Subject: [immprof] RE: Matter of BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, INC., 28 I&N Dec. 16 (DIR 2020)

 

Dan, thank you for sharing this new decision from EOIR Director McHenry.

 

This second decision in Matter of BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, INC. from EOIR Director McHenry may seem to come out of nowhere so, since the decision is aimed at CLINIC, we would like to provide background.

CLINIC’s network is comprised of approximately 380 immigration legal services organizations many of which have successfully relied on Recognition and Accreditation program to expand their legal services capacity in serving low-income immigrant communities. In support of our network, CLINIC has specifically catered to the needs of Accredited Representatives by, as examples, designing trial skills and legal writing trainings just for them and supporting them on their accreditation applications to EOIR. Given our expertise and interest in the Recognition and Accreditation program, when EOIR Director McHenry issued a call for amicus briefs on Recognition and Accreditation issues, CLINIC submitted a brief and we later learned, via the (first) decision in Matter of BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, 27 I&N Dec. 837 (DIR 2020), that we were the sole org to appear as amicus.

 

Unfortunately, in Matter of BAY AREA LEGAL SERVICES, 27 I&N Dec. 837 (DIR 2020), EOIR Director McHenry’s discussion of the skills needed to attain full accreditations was vague, unclear, and therefore confusing. Footnotes 13 and 14 in the decision appear to fault the applicant for full accreditation status for not practicing before EOIR before being granted full accreditation. At worst, the decision could lead one to infer that accredited representatives had to engage in unauthorized practice of immigration law to get the skills needed for full accreditation. We brought this issue to EOIR Director McHenry’s attention and he entertained our feedback during a phone conversation while disagreeing with our concerns. While the phone call was ultimately unhelpful as to this issue, we were able to discern just how unfamiliar he is with the Recognition and Accreditation program. At one point he stated that it was “totally conceivable that [accredited representatives] have some litigation experience.” It is not totally conceivable and we informed him of this too. After our call we sent EOIR Director McHenry the attached letter. We followed up with EOIR Director McHenry on Tuesday. On Wednesday he responded that “a type of formal response is forthcoming.” On Thursday he issued this second, published decision in which he chastises us for challenging him when we, as mere amicus curiae, have “no authority” to do so. However, you will notice that he also took the opportunity to clarify the very points we told him were vague and problematic. Of course, EOIR Director McHenry did not have to go the published decision route to deal with our concerns, but he preferred to project his power above being collaborative. And we have some concerns that EOIR will use this decision to prevent amici from following up to clear errors in other decisions where the respondent was pro se or the decision addresses in absentia orders.  While I am surprised that CLINIC seemingly made him feel threatened, as a respected retired IJ said, it is an “honor to be called out in something like this.”

 

I am not on the ICLINIC@LIST.MSU.EDU listserv so if someone could forward this email to them, I would be grateful. Thank you.

 

Michelle N. Mendez (she/her/ella/elle)

Director, Defending Vulnerable Populations Program

Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC)

Here’s a link to McHenry’s decision in Bay Area II:

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.justice.gov_eoir_page_file_1291786_download&d=DwMFAw&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=Wq374DTv_PXfIom65XBqoA&m=YJ89kw8K2uqLIw5FdRsilIr3v_T7ai5C3pv9pIngFJM&s=9RKJ0zaLqmRz-W92NyUtHQFB12wC4rz5tVptNEOgYrw&e=

And, here’s a link to the CLINIC letter to McHenry that apparently spurred Bay Area II:

McHenry amend request final

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

So, CLINIC, the sole Amicus, with much more experience in the Recognition & Accreditation Program than McHenry, offers McHenry some helpful suggestions for clarifying his decision. He should have thanked them and issued an amended decision on his own, as “real courts” sometimes do.

Instead, McHenry threw a hissy fit, imagining that his “authority” was being challenged. While making the suggested clarification, he took the occasion unnecessarily and inappropriately to publicly dump on the Amicus who helped him. 

Clearly, the act of an arrogant, yet insecure, person who knows he’s “way over his head” in his job. Sound familiar? But, hardly anything we didn’t already know about the awful legal and management mess at EOIR. And, in many ways a microcosm of the multiple disasters and institutional breakdowns sweeping our nation in the Age of the (Not So) Great Imposter.

I was gratified yesterday to hear former Ambassador Susan Rice on Meet the Press  “channel Courtside” by referring to Trump’s so-called intelligence advisors as a “Clown Show” 🤡 in connection with the “Putin’s bounty fiasco.” On the other hand, that our national intelligence is in the hands of sycophantic clowns advising the “Chief Clown” is a cause for grave concern.

The involvement of the EOIR Director in any form of case adjudication is highly questionable from an historical and ethical standpoint. Here’s my previous “mini-history” of the Director position from Courtside: https://immigrationcourtside.com/2017/07/06/katherine-m-reilly-named-acting-deputy-director-of-eoir-also-a-mini-history-of-eoir-directors/

Suffice it to say that McHenry’s performance is powerful evidence of the reasons why the Director of EOIR should be abolished, hopefully as part of Article I legislation, and replaced with an “Executive Director,” a purely administrative position with no judicial or “legal policy” functions, and subordinate to and reporting to the Chief Appellate Judge  who would replace the BIA Chair. The recent attempts to “reinsert” an improper adjudicative and “policy” role for the Director is yet another example of the gross legal, ethical, and management failures of EOIR under Trump’s DOJ kakistocracy. 

Due Process Forever!  Clown Courts,🤡 Never!

PWS

07-05-20

THE GIBSON REPORT — 06-29-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group  — DHS Suggests Asylum Seekers Should Get Used to ‘Homelessness’ After Stripping Work Permits — See What Other “Crimes Against Humanity” Are Being “Normalized” By The Trump Regime

 

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

COVID-19

Note: Policies are rapidly changing, so please verify the latest policies on the relevant government websites and with colleagues on listservs as best you can.

 

New

  • Newark Asylum Office Remains Closed due to unresolved facility issues unrelated to COVID-19

 

Closures

 

Guidance:

 

TOP NEWS

 

DHS Suggests Asylum Seekers Should Get Used to ‘Homelessness’ After Stripping Work Permits

AIC: The new rule, which goes into effect on August 25, 2020, would block work permits for almost all asylum applicants who arrive at the U.S.-Mexico border. It bans work permits for anyone who crosses the border between ports of entry to seek asylum.

 

More than 13,000 federal workers face a possible furlough of 30 days or longer

WaPo: Three-fourths of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services workforce — more than 13,000 employees — could be told as soon as Wednesday that they face extended furloughs starting Aug. 3 that would cut off their salaries and severely curtail the agency’s work, the union representing the employees has said.

 

Immigration Court Fee Hikes Sent To White House For Review

Law360: The U.S. Department of Justice will soon hike fees on immigration court filings following opposition from advocacy organizations and attorneys who claimed the fee increases, which could surpass 700%, will undermine due process for low-income immigrants.

 

Trump Suspends Visas Allowing Hundreds of Thousands of Foreigners to Work in the U.S.

NYT: The move is fiercely opposed by business leaders, who say it will block their ability to recruit critically needed workers from countries overseas.

 

As Pandemic Keeps Borders Shut, Closed Consulates Are Biggest Barrier for Many

WSJ: Couples are separated, workers and students remain stuck outside the U.S. as coronavirus shutdown extends into third month.

 

Trump’s Judicial Picks to Sway Immigration Law for Years

Law360: President Donald Trump’s 200th confirmation to the federal courts builds on a transformation of the judiciary that could rattle the U.S. immigration system for years to come, especially if Trump wins reelection.

 

ICE and CBP Agents Were Deployed at Black Lives Matter Protests

AIC: According to a leaked internal government document, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) deployed more than 700 personnel in the Washington, D.C. area alone.

 

COVID measures have made immigrant detentions longer and more isolated

Denverite: Some attorneys are working remotely to defend clients they’ve never met in person, others are delaying cases until they might feel comfortable returning to court in person.

 

Trump moving fast to shore up immigration campaign promises

Washington Examiner: The Trump campaign is highlighting the president’s immigration record under the banner of “Promises Made, Promises Kept,” citing an 84% reduction in apprehensions along the southern border.

 

San Diegans become American citizens during drive-thru naturalization ceremony

Union-Trib: More than 150 people from 42 countries were naturalized in an unusual drive-thru ceremony Wednesday morning held by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency.

 

City Funding for Undocumented Immigrants is Shrouded in Secrecy

DocumentedNY: Still no official information on how to apply, who qualifies or which organizations are giving out funds.

 

Indonesian villagers defy Covid-19 warnings to rescue Rohingya refugees

Guardian: Residents repeatedly urged the authorities to do something, but they were told the group could not be brought to shore because to do so would risk spreading coronavirus. Worried that people’s lives were in immediate danger, they took matters into their own hands and sailed out with ropes to tether the boat to safety.

 

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

 

Immigration Decisions in the Supreme Court 2019 Term, Upcoming Cases in the 2020 Term

ImmProf: Immigration proved to comprise a significant part of the U.S. Supreme Court’s docket for the 2019 Term.  Eight decisions directly or indirectly address immigration issues… At least for now, there do not appear to be any major cases on the Court’s docket for the 2020 Term.

 

SCOTUS confirms limitations on federal review for asylum seekers

SCOTUSblog: In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam upheld a scheme of limited and narrow judicial review over expedited removal, a bare-bones administrative process created under the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.

 

Appeals court allows Trump’s expansion of fast-track deportation

RollCall: The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Department of Homeland Security did not have to go through federal rule-making procedures before making the change in July 2019.

 

Federal judge blocks removal of Honduran boy caught in coronavirus-related border restrictions

CNN: A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from removing a 16-year-old Honduran boy from the United States who was at risk of being expelled as a result of new border restrictions relating to coronavirus.

 

Government must release migrant children in detention centers because of coronavirus, judge orders

NBC: Children held more than 20 days at certain facilities should be released by July 17, Judge Dolly Gee said.

 

U.S. Magistrate Judge Finds Petitioner’s Membership in the CCP Fell Within “Meaningful Association” Exception

A federal judge concluded that the petitioner established a preponderance of evidence that she had no meaningful association with the China Communist Party (CCP), and thus she was not ineligible for naturalization under INA §313. Courtesy of Baolin Chen. (Crosby v. Miller, et al., 2/3/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062905

 

District Court Finds Child Born in Canada to Same-Sex Couple Is a U.S. Citizen

The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland held that DOS erred in concluding that a child born in Canada to same-sex, naturalized U.S. citizens via assisted reproductive technology and surrogacy was born out of wedlock under INA §309. (Kiviti, et al., v. Pompeo, et al., 6/17/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062233

 

CA2 Remands Asylum Claim to Consider Petitioners’ Evidence of Changed Country Conditions in Indonesia

The court held that the BIA’s denial of the petitioners’ motion to reopen failed to account for relevant evidence of changed country conditions for Christians in Indonesia, and that 8 CFR §1003.2(c)(1) did not require them to submit a new asylum application. (Tanusantoso v. Barr, 6/23/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062536

 

CA7 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Argentinian Petitioner Who Alleged Persecution Based on His Family Membership

The court held that the record supported the BIA’s conclusion that petitioner had not presented a case warranting relief because of a credible fear of persecution or torture, and that the BIA had correctly determined that a waiver signed upon his entry was valid. (Ferreyra v. Barr, 6/16/20) AILA D

 

CA8 Says Conviction in Minnesota for Obstruction of Legal Process Is Not Categorically a CIMT

The court held that the BIA erred in finding that the petitioner’s conviction in Minnesota for obstruction of legal process was categorically a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT), and thus granted the petition for review and vacated the BIA’s order of removal. (Ortiz v. Barr, 6/23/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062537

 

CA9 Finds “Wealthy Landowners” in Colombia Is Not a PSG

Denying the petition for review, the court held that the BIA had properly concluded that the petitioner’s proposed particular social group (PSG) of wealthy landowners in Colombia was not cognizable, because it lacked particularity and social distinction. (Cordoba v. Barr, 6/16/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062539

 

BIA Holds Georgia Domestic Violence Statute Not a CIMT

Unpublished BIA decision holds that simple battery family violence under Ga. Code Ann. 16-5-23(f) is not a CIMT. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Cooke, 3/5/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062402

 

BIA Holds Ninth Circuit TPS Decision Constitutes Fundamental Change in Law

Unpublished BIA decision holds Ramirez v. Brown, 852 F.3d 954 (9th Cir. 2017), which held that TPS holders are deemed admitted for adjustment purposes, as a fundamental change in law sufficient to warrant reopening sua sponte. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Acevedo, 3/2/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062401

 

BIA Finds Failure to Challenge Removability Constituted Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Unpublished BIA decision finds that respondent’s prior attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to argue that indecent exposure under Iowa Code 709.9 was not a CIMT. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Kahn, 2/28/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062303

 

BIA Holds Pennsylvania Statute Not an Aggravated Felony or Firearms Offense

Unpublished BIA decision holds that possession of a firearm under 18 Pa. Const. Stat. 6105(a)(1) is neither an aggravated felony nor firearms offense because the state definition encompasses some antique firearms. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Engelund, 2/27/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062302

 

USCIS Final Rule on Employment Authorization for Asylum Applicants

USCIS final rule making multiple changes to the regulations governing asylum applications and eligibility for employment authorization based on a pending asylum application. The rule is effective 8/25/20. (85 FR 38532, 6/26/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062236

 

Presidential Proclamation Suspending Entry of Individuals Who Present a Risk to the U.S. Labor Market Following the Coronavirus Outbreak

On 6/22/20, President Trump issued a proclamation continuing Proclamation 10014 and suspending and limiting the entry, with exceptions, of individuals seeking entry on an H-1B, H-2B, J, or L visa, including individuals accompanying or following to join people on these visas. (85 FR 38263, 6/25/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062237

 

DOS Final Rule Removing Defunct Visa Classification for Women Expatriates

DOS final rule removing from the regulations a provision relating to a defunct immigrant visa classification for women who lost U.S. citizenship as a result of marrying a foreign national prior to September 22, 1922. The rule is effective 6/26/20. (85 FR 38321, 6/26/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062600

 

USCIS 60-Day Notice and Request for Comments on Proposed Revisions to Form I-485

USCIS 60-day notice and request for comments on proposed revisions to Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, and related forms. Comments are due 8/24/20. (85 FR 38151, 6/25/20) AILA Doc. No. 20062535

 

Texas Service Center Moving to New Address on June 26, 2020

On June 23, USCIS announced that on June 26, 2020, the Texas Service Center (TSC) will move to a new address. Although the move is scheduled for June 26, USCIS cannot accept mail at the new address until Monday, June 29. AILA Doc. No. 20062330

 

RESOURCES

 

 

EVENTS

 

Note: Check with organizers regarding cancellations/changes

 

ImmProf

 

Monday, June 29, 2020

Sunday, June 28, 2020

Friday, June 26, 2020

Thursday, June 25, 2020

Wednesday, June 24, 2020

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

Monday, June 22, 2020

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

Thanks, Elizabeth, for chronicling the cruelty, stupidity, illegality, immorality, and “malicious incompetence” of  America’s White Nationalist regime. The real question: How have we as Americans and human beings allowed this outrage to happen on “our watch?”

PWS

06-30-20

ROUND TABLE STRIKES ANOTHER BLOW IN SUPPORT OF JUSTICE⚔️🛡: Immigration Detainees Have a Right to Due Process in Bond Hearings — PADILLA RAUDALES V. DECKER, 2D CIR.

CHRISTOPHER T. CASAMASSIMA
CHRISTOPHER T. CASAMASSIMA
Partner
Wilmer Hale
Los Angeles
SOUVIK SAHA
SOUVIK SAHA
Counsel
Wilmer Hale
Washington, D.C.
Knightess
Knightess of the Round Table

 

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE1

Amici curiae have served as Immigration Judges and as members of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). Amici are invested in the resolution of this case because they have dedicated their careers to improving tghe fairness and

2

efficiency of the U.S. immigration system. Through their centuries-long collective experience, amici have adjudicated hundreds—if not thousands—of immigration detention hearings. Amici have substantial knowledge of immigration detention issues, including the practical impact of the burden of proof in such hearings.

INTRODUCTION AND ARGUMENT SUMMARY

Under the Fifth Amendment, “[n]o person” shall “be deprived of … liberty … without due process of law[.]” U.S. Const. amend. V. The “[f]reedom from imprisonment—from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint—lies at the heart of the liberty that Clause protects.” Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 690 (2001). This liberty is so fundamental that the law tolerates its restraint only in limited circumstances.

1

Amici are invested in the resolution of

2

efficiency of the U.S. immigration system. Through their centuries-long collective experience, amici have adjudicated hundreds—if not thousands—of immigration detention hearings. Amici have substantial knowledge of immigration detention issues, including the practical impact of the burden of proof in such hearings.

INTRODUCTION AND ARGUMENT SUMMARY

Under the Fifth Amendment, “[n]o person” shall “be deprived of … liberty … without due process of law[.]” U.S. Const. amend. V. The “[f]reedom from imprisonment—from government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint—lies at the heart of the liberty that Clause protects.” Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 690 (2001). This liberty is so fundamental that the law tolerates its restraint only in limited circumstances.

1

Amici are invested in the resolution of this case because they have dedicated their careers to improving the fairness and

Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”).

Amici have filed substantially similar briefs in other cases involving burden of proof issues in proceedings under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). Here, no party or party’s counsel authored this brief in whole or in part, nor contributed money to preparing or submitting this brief. Only amici or their counsel contributed money to prepare or submit this brief. The parties have consented to the filing of this brief.

2

A complete list of amici is included in this brief’s addendum.

Case 19-3220, Document 116, 06/03/2020, 2854056, Page13 of 56

Such restraint violates the Due Process Clause “unless the detention is ordered in a criminal proceeding with adequate procedural protections, or, in certain special and narrow nonpunitive circumstances, where a special justification, such as harm-threatening mental illness, outweighs the individual’s constitutionally protected interest in avoiding physical restraint.” Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 690. Yet, federal law provides far greater protections to criminal defendants than it does to noncitizens in civil proceedings—even though the distinctions between criminal and non-criminal proceedings mean very little to a person sitting behind bars.

Accordingly, noncitizens already face significant hurdles in detention proceedings brought under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). At issue in this appeal is whether another, even higher and more fundamental, barrier to due process can be erected in this Circuit: do noncitizens bear the burden of justifying their freedom from detention? For noncitizens, the answer to this question is no mere technicality—it can mean the difference between freedom and confinement. This burden’s allocation, therefore, “reflects the value society places on individual liberty.” Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 425 (1979).

Given their collective experience in adjudicating immigration bond hearings, amici are particularly well-suited to address the monumental question in this case. To that end, amici wish to share the following observations for this Court’s benefit:

-2-

Case 19-3220, Document 116, 06/03/2020, 2854056, Page14 of 56

First, noncitizens already enjoy fewer procedural protections than criminal defendants. We contrast the procedural rules for detaining criminal defendants and noncitizens to underscore the challenges that noncitizens face in immigration bond hearings, and to highlight the need for a presumption against detention as one of the last remaining bulwarks to protect noncitizens’ liberty.

Second, detention of noncitizens consumes the government’s already- limited administrative and judicial resources. Amici highlight the staggering costs that are associated with immigration detention, as well as the strain on immigration courts resulting from the unnecessary detention of noncitizens.

Third, contrary to the government’s position, placing the burden of proof on the government would not generate fiscal or administrative hardship. Amici advance that position with confidence because the government previously shouldered that exact burden over a fifteen-year period. Several of the amici served as Immigration Judges within that period and found that this older system did not cause additional costs or administrative hurdles.

Fourth, in amici’s experience, detaining noncitizens actually increases the burden on the immigration court system. While in detention, noncitizens face significant challenges in adequately preparing their cases. Further, the Executive Branch now utilizes “performance metrics” to encourage Immigration Judges to accelerate the fact-finding process in detention proceedings. With less time for

-3-

Case 19-3220, Document 116, 06/03/2020, 2854056, Page15 of 56

individualized fact-finding, noncitizens will have even less opportunity to marshal the facts needed to satisfy the burden to avoid detention. Reallocating the burden of proof in immigration bond hearings, therefore, would reduce costs.

Fifth, and finally, amici offer alternatives to noncitizen detention that would inject much-needed resources to the immigration court system. The government’s aversion to such alternatives rest on a single statistic suggesting that the vast majority of noncitizens abscond upon release on bond. That statistic, however, is misleading and inconsistent with other available data, and bears little resemblance to the reality that amici encountered in years of adjudicating immigration cases.

Together, these observations should lead this Court to conclude that due process requires the government to make some sort of individualized showing before it may place noncitizens under lock and key.

. . . .

Read the full brief here: AS FILED No. 19-3220 Amici Br. Padilla Raudales v. Decker (2d Cir.)

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

Thanks again not only to the signatory members of our Round Table, but especially to CHRISTOPHER T. CASAMASSIMA, SOUVIK SAHA, and the other members of their pro bono team over at  WILMER HALE.  Without assistance like yours, the “Voices of the Round Table” would not be heard in support of justice in so many cases throughout our nation!

DUE PROCESS FOREVER!

PWS

06-04-20

THE GIBSON REPORT — 06-01-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

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

#BlackLivesMatter

 

Do Black Lives Matter in the immigrant rights movement?

AlJazeera (from 2017): Black migrants are being assimilated into the terror of the prison industrial complex at an alarming rate. The over-policing, over incarceration, and overt violence of the policing apparatus that is at the core of the #BlackLivesMatter movement is also an immigrant rights issue.

 

Victory for Liberians in the U.S.: Deferred Enforced Departure, A Pathway to Citizenship, and An Immigration Success Story

Featured June 10 event from the NYCBA with a fantastic panel:

Tsion Gurmu,  Legal Director, Black Alliance for Just Immigration, Founder and Director, Queer Black Immigrant Project
Amaha Kassa, Founder and Executive Director, African Communities Together
Yatta Kiazolu, a named Plaintiff in ACT et al. v. Trump et al., and a Liberian DED holder
Patrice Lawrence, Co-Director, UndocuBlack Network

 

COVID-19

Note: Policies are rapidly changing, so please verify the latest policies on the relevant government websites and with colleagues on listservs as best you can.

 

New

 

Closures

 

Guidance:

 

TOP NEWS

 

DOJ memo offered to buy out immigration board members

Roll Call: The Justice Department offered buyouts to pre-Trump administration career members on its influential immigration appeals board as part of an ongoing effort to restructure the immigration court system.

 

With citizenship ceremonies postponed, hundreds of thousands could miss chance to vote in November

WaPo: Though USCIS is scheduled to begin a phased reopening next week, the agency has not committed to resuming a full slate of ceremonies nor has publicly released a plan for rescheduling the approximately 150,000 naturalizations that have been postponed because of the closures.

 

A US immigration agency could run out of money by the end of summer without a $1.2 billion bailout

Vox: US Citizenship and Immigration Services is facing a massive budget shortfall because fewer immigrants are applying to enter the US.

 

How Coronavirus Relief Is Being Distributed to Undocumented Immigrants

DocumentedNY: Private donors and independent organizations have connected to move millions of dollars in aid across a gaping hole left in the government’s COVID-19 response.

 

Emails Show Long Island Police Departments Worked Closely With ICE

DocumentedNY: The report, titled “When Help Is Nowhere to Be Found,” is focused on Operation Matador, which was launched by ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations department in May 2017 to combat MS-13. According to the report, Operation Matador was initially envisioned as a 90-day effort but has since become a permanent operation.

 

NYC Council Votes to Ban the Terms ‘Alien’ and ‘Illegal Immigrant’ on Official Docs

NBC: The NYC Council voted Thursday to ban the “dehumanizing and offensive” words in local laws, rules and documents, said Speaker Corey Johnson. The term that officials will use going forward will be “noncitizen.”

 

ICE Tells Parents to Separate From Their Children or Risk Indefinite Detention Together

AIC: According to recent reports from attorneys for the detained families, on May 13 and 14, ICE gave the parents a “binary choice:” agree for their child to be released without them or waive the child’s right to release under the longstanding Flores settlement that governs custody of immigrant children.

 

ICE Detainee Who Died Of Covid-19 Suffered Horrifying Neglect

Intercept: The men who were with Escobar Mejia in his final days say they did everything they could to alert ICE and CoreCivic, the private prison corporation that runs Otay Mesa, of his worsening condition, and that the officials responsible for his well-being failed to take those alerts seriously. See also Second man with COVID-19 dies in US immigration custody.

 

Mexico’s President Says Most Domestic Violence Calls Are ‘Fake’

NTY: The leader compared the requests for help to prank calls, the latest controversy over his government’s response to record levels of violence against women.

 

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

 

SCOTUS Held that Courts Can Review Factual Challenges to a CAT Order

The Supreme Court found that 8 U. S. C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) and (D) do not preclude judicial review of factual challenges to an order denying relief under CAT, which protects noncitizens from removal to a country where they would likely face torture. (Nasrallah v. Barr, 6/1/20) AILA Doc. No. 20060132

 

Federal Court Rules Trump Administration Must Provide Fair Hearings For Immigrants

CAIR: A federal court has ruled the Trump administration must provide fair hearings for people in immigration detention and requires the government to justify detention at a bond hearing. The ruling also requires immigration judges to consider people’s financial circumstances when setting bond amounts and forms of release.

 

CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Salvadoran Petitioner Where IJ and BIA Relied on Boston’s “Gang Assessment Database”

The court upheld the BIA’s denial of asylum, finding that the IJ’s adverse credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence, and that the introduction of law enforcement gang database records did not violate the petitioner’s due process rights. (Diaz Ortiz v. Barr, 5/15/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052634

 

CA1 Finds Petitioner Pardoned by Connecticut Board of Pardons and Paroles Was Eligible for a Pardon Waiver

The court held that the BIA erred when it found that the pardon issued to the petitioner by the Connecticut Board of Pardons and Paroles was not effective for purposes of establishing entitlement to a waiver of removal under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(vi). (Thompson v. Barr, 5/21/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052636

 

CA2 Holds Misprision of Felony is not a CIMT – Mendez v. Barr

Justia: The court held that the government failed to show that misprision rises to the level of base, vile, conscience-shocking conduct traditionally attributed to the gravest and most inherently evil offenses. Furthermore, nothing in the misprision statute suggests that the crime has, as an element, the fraudulent intent necessary for misprision to constitute a CIMT.

 

CA3 Holds BIA Erred in Retroactively Applying Matter of Diaz-Lizarraga to Find Petitioner Removable

The court granted the petition for review, holding that the BIA erred in retroactively applying the new standard for theft-related crimes involving moral turpitude (CIMTs) that it had promulgated in Matter of Diaz-Lizarraga to the petitioner. (Francisco-Lopez v. Att’y Gen., 5/15/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052637

 

CA5 Upholds BIA’s Asylum Denial to Mexican Petitioner Whose Father Was Extorted by Zetas Drug Cartel

Finding that substantial evidence supported BIA’s denial of asylum, the court held that petitioner had failed to meet his burden to establish that it would be unreasonable for him to relocate to another part of Mexico, away from his father’s extortionists. (Munoz-Granados v. Barr, 5/12/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052638

 

CA6 Holds BIA Erred in Finding That Asylum-Seeking Mayan Indigenous Woman Could Reasonably Relocate Within Guatemala

The court found that the BIA’s conclusion that the government showed by a preponderance of the evidence that the Guatemalan petitioner could internally relocate and that it would be reasonable for her to do so was not supported by substantial evidence. (Juan Antonio v. Barr, 5/19/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052640

 

CA6 Says Withholding Applicants Must Be Given the Chance to Explain Why Corroborative Evidence Is Not Reasonably Available

Granting the petition for review of the BIA’s denial of withholding of removal, the court found that the IJ and BIA erred in failing to give the petitioner an opportunity to explain why he could not reasonably obtain certain corroborative evidence. (Guzman-Vazquez v. Barr, 5/18/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052639

 

CA7 Says BIA Held Petitioner to Unduly Demanding Burden on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Allegation

The court found that the BIA should not have faulted petitioner for failing to provide his initial counsel with information significant to a potential U visa application, but denied petition for review because he could not prove prejudice. (Alvarez-Espino v. Barr, 3/6/20, amended 5/20/20) AILA Doc. No. 20031802

 

CA9 Finds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Consider Petitioner’s “Settled Course” Argument Where BIA Denied Sua Sponte Reconsideration

The court held that the petitioner’s “settled course of adjudication” argument was barred by the court’s general rule that it lacks jurisdiction to review claims that the BIA should have exercised its sua sponte power in a given case. (Lona v. Barr, 5/15/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052641

 

CA10 Says Post-Departure Bar Does Not Eliminate an IJ’s Jurisdiction to Move Sua Sponte to Reopen Removal Proceedings

The court held that the BIA erred in ruling that the IJ lacked jurisdiction to move sua sponte to reopen petitioner’s removal proceedings, finding that the post-departure bar does not apply to the IJ’s own sua sponte authority to reopen removal proceedings. (Reyes-Vargas v. Barr, 5/14/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052642

 

District Court Orders ICE to Explain Why It Cannot Immediately Begin Testing NWDC Detainees for COVID-19

A federal court in Washington ordered ICE to explain why it cannot immediately begin testing detainees at the Northwest Detention Center (NWDC) for COVID-19 on a voluntary basis and implement a plan for those that refuse testing. (Castañeda Juarez v. Asher, 5/28/20) AILA Doc. No. 20060133

 

Complaint Requesting an Injunction Against the April 2020 Proclamation to Protect Minors from Aging Out

AILA and partners filed a complaint requesting a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining the government from implementing or enforcing any part of the April 20, 2020, Proclamation to protect minors who may age out. (Gomez, et al., v. Trump, et al., 5/28/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052837

 

Civil Rights Coalition Files Lawsuit to Protect Families from Decades of Separation

AILA, Justice Action Center, and Innovation Law Lab, with pro bono support from Mayer Brown LLP, have filed a lawsuit on behalf of U.S. citizens and LPRs petitioning for their children and derivative relatives to join them in the U.S. who would “age-out” while the administration’s ban is in place. AILA Doc. No. 20052838

 

EOIR Announces New BIA Chairman

EOIR announced the appointment of David H. Wetmore as the chairman of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Wetmore was appointed by Attorney General William Barr as the Chief Appellate Immigration Judge of the BIA in May 2020. Notice includes Wetmore’s biographical information. AILA Doc. No. 20052932

 

Practice Alert: DHS and DOJ Issue Joint Statement Rescheduling Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) Cases

On May 10, 2020, DOJ EOIR and DHS issued a joint statement on the rescheduling of MPP hearings. This practice alert provides an overview of the changes made by this statement to prior DHS procedures for MPP cases without individual notice to affected migrants or their attorneys. AILA Doc. No. 20051347

 

USCIS Lockbox Rejecting Some I-485 Adjustment of Status Applications

AILA has recently been made aware that USCIS has been issuing notices to applicants and attorneys regarding Form I-485 adjustment of status applications that were wrongfully rejected by the Lockbox on the basis of an expired form version. AILA Doc. No. 20041738

 

CDC Order Extending and Amending Order Suspending the Introduction of Certain Persons from Canada and Mexico

CDC order extending the 3/20/20 order that suspended the introduction of certain persons traveling from Canada and Mexico until the CDC determines that the danger of further introduction of COVID-19 into the United States has ceased to be a serious danger to the public health. (85 FR 31503, 5/26/20) AILA Doc. No. 20052037

 

RESOURCES

 

 

EVENTS

 

Note: Check with organizers regarding cancellations/changes

 

ImmProf

 

Monday, June 1, 2020

Sunday, May 31, 2020

Saturday, May 30, 2020

Friday, May 29, 2020

Thursday, May 28, 2020

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Tuesday, May 26, 2020

Monday, May 25, 2020

 

This email, including any attachments, may contain information that is legally privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the person this email was intended to reach, then do not share, distribute, or copy it. Please notify the person who sent this email immediately and then delete the email, including any attachments.

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

I particularly recommend the first item in Elizabeth’s report, “Do Black Lives Matter in the immigrants rights movement?” by Jamila Osman. “The immigrant rights movement has never fully addressed the needs of black migrants in its advocacy work.”

The Trump regime’s “Dred Scottification Project,” often aided by a feckless Congress and complicit Article III Courts, is part of a White Nationalist, far-right agenda that aims at dehumanizing a much larger group than migrants and the Hispanic community. They just happen to be the convenient, easy victims, as shown by the effective repeal of Constitutional due process protections, asylum laws, and immigration laws by the regime using Executive fiat and obvious pretexts (many middle schoolers in the U.S. probably could tell you exactly what Trump’s racist intent is, even if the J.R. Five, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, certain panels of the Second Circuit, and most of the GOP disingenuously claims otherwise) that have garnered neither the widespread outrage (short of a few feckless Dems) nor effective “pushback” from Congress and the Article III Courts that they deserved! 

The African-American community is no stranger to the abuses heaped on people of color by bogus and disingenuous calls for “law and order.” The treatment of Haitian TPS holders is every bit as outrageous, racist, and lawless as the Administration’s threats to end DACA — threats enabled and made worse by a Supreme Court without the courage and decency to do its job and  “just say no” to the regime’s continuing White Nationalist abuses of our Constitution, our laws, and our national humanity. 

What might recent history have been if the Supremes had stood up to Trump’s initial Constitutionally abusive, politically motivated, racially and religiously bigoted pretextual “Travel Ban” instead of going “belly up” and fecklessly inviting more abuses in the name of fabricated “national security?”  What if Congress by veto-proof margins had stood up for the legal rights of asylum seekers at the Southern Border and of brown-skinned children not to be “put in cages?” Instead, many GOP politicos actually joined in and egged on these disgusting abuses of humanity and degredations of our justice system. What if the Supremes had delivered a united condemnation of the GOP’s overtly racist schemes to disenfranchise minority voters and deny them the political power they have earned? Everybody ultimately pays a price for spinelessness in the face of tyranny!

America needs and deserves better, from our Executive, our Congress, and our Courts. There’s unlikely to be much long-term equilibrium and “normalcy” in the U.S. until we get substantial changes in the composition, competency, and compassion of all three branches of our failing Government and its democratic institutions.

Government is actually there to provide and guarantee “equal justice for all,” not for the self-preservation of existing institutions and those privileged ones who temporarily inhabit them and apparently believe themselves to be “above the fray” and the human pain and suffering caused by their fecklessness and complicity.

It’s also worth noting, that despite the lack of a systemic response from the Article III’s putting an end to EOIR’s unconstitutionally abusive “enforcement masquerading as a court” system, individual court decisions continue to find abuses by the BIA in fairly applying the “basics” of asylum and immigraton laws. Elizabeth’s report lists a number of recent instances.

Oh, that the Article IIIs would “connect the dots” and ask themselves why a system supposedly set up to provide due process to individuals regularly goes out of its way to misapply the law to wrongfully subject individuals to deportation, sometimes to situations where they have a substantial risk of death or torture upon return?

This November, vote like you life depends on it. Because it does!

Due Process Forever! Complicit Institutions & Those Who Hide in Them, Never!

PWS

06-02-209

⚖️👍🏼SUPREMES UPHOLD JUDICIAL REVIEW OF CAT DENIAL, 7-2 — NASRALLAH v. BARR, Opinion By Justice Kavananaugh — Round Table ⚔️🛡 Files Amicus For Winners!

NASRALLAH v. BARR, No. 18-432, June 1, 2020

SUPREME COURT SYLLABUS:

OCTOBER TERM, 2019 1

Syllabus

NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus

NASRALLAH v. BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR

THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

No. 18–1432. Argued March 2, 2020—Decided June 1, 2020

Under federal immigration law, noncitizens who commit certain crimes are removable from the United States. During removal proceedings, a noncitizen who demonstrates a likelihood of torture in the designated country of removal is entitled to relief under the international Conven- tion Against Torture (CAT) and may not be removed to that country. If an immigration judge orders removal and denies CAT relief, the noncitizen may appeal both orders to the Board of Immigration Ap- peals and then to a federal court of appeals. But if the noncitizen has committed any crime specified in 8 U. S. C. §1252(a)(2)(C), the scope of judicial review of the removal order is limited to constitutional and legal challenges. See §1252(a)(2)(D).

The Government sought to remove petitioner Nidal Khalid Nasral- lah after he pled guilty to receiving stolen property. Nasrallah applied for CAT relief to prevent his removal to Lebanon. The Immigration Judge ordered Nasrallah removed and granted CAT relief. On appeal, the Board of Immigration Appeals vacated the CAT relief order and ordered Nasrallah removed to Lebanon. The Eleventh Circuit declined to review Nasrallah’s factual challenges to the CAT order because Nasrallah had committed a §1252(a)(2)(C) crime and Circuit precedent precluded judicial review of factual challenges to both the final order of removal and the CAT order in such cases.

Held: Sections 1252(a)(2)(C) and (D) do not preclude judicial review of a noncitizen’s factual challenges to a CAT order. Pp. 5–13.

(a) Three interlocking statutes establish that CAT orders may be re- viewed together with final orders of removal in a court of appeals. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 authorizes noncitizens to obtain direct “review of a final order of re-

2

NASRALLAH v. BARR Syllabus

moval” in a court of appeals, §1252(a)(1), and requires that all chal- lenges arising from the removal proceeding be consolidated for review, §1252(b)(9). The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (FARRA) implements Article 3 of CAT and provides for judicial review of CAT claims “as part of the review of a final order of removal.” §2242(d). And the REAL ID Act of 2005 clarifies that final orders of removal and CAT orders may be reviewed only in the courts of appeals. §§1252(a)(4)–(5). Pp. 5–6.

(b) Sections 1252(a)(2)(C) and (D) preclude judicial review of factual challenges only to final orders of removal. A CAT order is not a final “order of removal,” which in this context is defined as an order “con- cluding that the alien is deportable or ordering deportation,” §1101(a)(47)(A). Nor does a CAT order merge into a final order of re- moval, because a CAT order does not affect the validity of a final order of removal. See INS v. Chadha, 462 U. S. 919, 938. FARRA provides that a CAT order is reviewable “as part of the review of a final order of removal,” not that it is the same as, or affects the validity of, a final order of removal. Had Congress wished to preclude judicial review of factual challenges to CAT orders, it could have easily done so. Pp. 6– 9.

(c) The standard of review for factual challenges to CAT orders is substantial evidence—i.e., the agency’s “findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” §1252(b)(4)(B).

The Government insists that the statute supplies no judicial review of factual challenges to CAT orders, but its arguments are unpersua- sive. First, the holding in Foti v. INS, 375 U. S. 217, depends on an outdated interpretation of “final orders of deportation” and so does not control here. Second, the Government argues that §1252(a)(1) sup- plies judicial review only of final orders of removal, and if a CAT order is not merged into that final order, then no statute authorizes review of the CAT claim. But both FARRA and the REAL ID Act provide for direct review of CAT orders in the courts of appeals. Third, the Gov- ernment’s assertion that Congress would not bar review of factual challenges to a removal order and allow such challenges to a CAT order ignores the importance of adherence to the statutory text as well as the good reason Congress had for distinguishing the two—the facts that rendered the noncitizen removable are often not in serious dis- pute, while the issues related to a CAT order will not typically have been litigated prior to the alien’s removal proceedings. Fourth, the Government’s policy argument—that judicial review of the factual components of a CAT order would unduly delay removal proceedings— has not been borne out in practice in those Circuits that have allowed factual challenges to CAT orders. Fifth, the Government fears that a

Cite as: 590 U. S. ____ (2020) 3 Syllabus

decision allowing factual review of CAT orders would lead to factual challenges to other orders in the courts of appeals. But orders denying discretionary relief under §1252(a)(2)(B) are not affected by this deci- sion, and the question whether factual challenges to statutory with- holding orders under §1231(b)(3)(A) are subject to judicial review is not presented here. Pp. 9–13.

762 Fed. Appx. 638, reversed.

KAVANAUGH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, and GORSUCH, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which ALITO, J., joined.

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

Score at least a modest victory for the NDPA over the “Deportation Railroad.”

Once again the Round Table 🛡⚔️ intervened with an amicus brief on the side of justice.  Here’s a report from Judge Jeffrey Chase:

Hi All:  Our Round Table filed an amicus brief in Nasrallah v. Barr.  The Supreme Court issued it’s 7-2 decision in the case today, and we were on the winning side.
Kavanaugh wrote the decision, and was joined by Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Gorsuch.  Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion that was joined by Alito.
The decision reverses the 11th Cir. and holds that federal courts may review factual issues as well as legal and constitutional issues in CAT appeals  filed by noncitizens with criminal convictions falling under 8 C.F.R. section 1252(a)(2)(C).
Gibson Dunn assisted us with the drafting of the brief.
Best, Jeff
Jeffrey S. Chase
Hon. Jeffrey S. Chase
Jeffrey S. Chase Blog
Coordinator & Chief Spokesperson, Round Table of Retired Immigration Judges
Knightess
Knightess of the Round Table

And, of course, as Jeffrey notes, we couldn’t have done it without help from our pro bono heroes 🥇 over at Gibson Dunn! Many, many thanks!

Great that Justice Kavanaugh, Chief Justice Roberts, and Justice Gorsuch “saw the light” on this one! Not sure how often it will happen in the future, but gotta take what we can get.

Also, given the “haste makes waste” policies thrust on EOIR by the DOJ under Trump, and the significant number of fundamental legal and factual errors made by the BIA, judicial review is likely to turn up additional instances of substandard decision-making.

PWS

06-01-20

HON. JEFFREY S. CHASE: Some Uplifting News For Mothers’ Day Involving the Generosity Of The NDPA, Many From The “Arlington Brigade!”😎👍

Jeffrey S. Chase
Hon. Jeffrey S. Chase
Jeffrey S. Chase Blog
Coordinator & Chief Spokesperson, Round Table of Retired Immigration Judges
Eileen Blessinger, Esquire
Eileen Blessinger, Esquire
Blessinger Legal PLLC
Falls Church, VA

https://www.jeffreyschase.com/blog/2020/5/8/small-acts-of-thanks-2

 

JEFFREY S. CHASE | OPINIONS/ANALYSIS ON IMMIGRATION LAW

Blog

 

Archive

 

Press and Interviews

Calendar

 

Contact

Small Acts of ThanksI would like to share a nice story (for once).  It illustrates how a postscript can sometimes prove far more meaningful than the main story.

A friend and colleague in the DC area, Eileen Blessinger of Blessinger Legal, planned a series of training lectures via Zoom during the pandemic.  When I initially agreed to present one of the sessions on asylum law, I was told it would be for an audience of eighteen people.

Somehow, the number of attendees increased significantly.  Because meetings of more than 100 people require an upgrade on Zoom, Eileen asked participants for a small donation.  I believe the training went well, and that seemed to be the end of the story.

Later that night, Eileen informed me that because the number of attendees was well over 100, there was a surplus of donations beyond what was needed to cover the Zoom upgrade.  After a brief exchange, we agreed that the surplus should go to pandemic first responders.

Realizing the virtue of what was initially an unintended consequence, the next speaker, Louisiana-based attorney Glenda Regnart, also agreed to open her session to a wider audience, who were invited to make a small donation to treat first responders.  Subsequent speakers Kelly White, Himedes Chicas, Anam Rahman, Julie Soininen, Danielle Beach-Oswald, Heain Lee, and Jennifer Jaimes agreed to follow suit.  Over $1300 was raised.

Eileen took over from there, inviting suggestions for recipients from her staff.  So far, she has provided meals to nurses at Mass General Hospital in Boston; to employees at supermarkets in Louisiana and Virginia, and to preparers of meals for those in need in Alexandria, VA.  Plans are also in the works to provide a meal for DC-area sanitation workers.

Those of us able to quarantine comfortably and work from home owe an unimaginable debt to those putting themselves at risk to keep our cities and towns running, keeping us all fed and safe.  And as most of us read of infection and death rates as impersonal statistics, the nurses and other medical workers who are battling the disease on the frontlines on a daily basis, putting their own health at risk in the process, are far beyond our ability to properly thank.

It was a donation to another group that touched me in an unexpected way because of its connection to an earlier unspeakable tragedy.  Eileen forwarded me the accompanying photo of FDNY firefighters enjoying the meal provided for them from the training surplus.  Looking at the photo, I was suddenly transported back to the fall of 2001.  My wife and I, who both worked in lower Manhattan, were physically very close to events on 9/11.  What we saw still triggers traumatic memories.  Among the horrible and tragic statistics is the heartbreaking fact that 343 firefighters died that day.  More than 200 more have died as the result of illnesses they subsequently contracted in the rescue effort.

I walked past the firehouse on Duane Street every day on my way to and from work when I was an immigration judge.  I remember the feeling of grief when passing by in the months following 9/11, and of stopping there one day in October to make a donation, and of words completely failing me as I tried to express my sadness and gratitude.

In the present pandemic, 15 firefighters in the unit pictured here (Engine 286/Ladder 135) had contracted COVID-19 as of last week.  As early as April 7, 500 of New York’s Bravest had contracted coronavirus.  Many more continue to be exposed as first responders to emergency calls from those stricken with the disease.  And the firefighter who took the photo, Jerry Ross, was also a 9/11 responder.

So once again, we are reminded of the great debt we owe to so many.  Thanks again to Eileen and all of the other speakers, and of course to all who contributed.  Hopefully, these small acts of thanks will bring a little joy to these most essential and selfless heroes.

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

Go to Jeffrey’s blog at the above link for the accompanying photo of Engine 286/Ladder 135 enjoying their meal!

Thanks Jeffrey & Eileen!

So proud that in addition to Eileen, of course, so many of the wonderful pro bono attorneys highlighted in this article were “regulars” before us during my time at the Arlington Immigration Court: Kelly White, Anam Rahman, Julie Soininen, Danielle Beach-Oswald, and Jennifer Jaimes.  Also, Jennifer is a former Legal Intern at the Arlington Immigration Court who was part of our daily “run the stairs challenge” (at the former Ballston location) with then Court Administrator Judges Bryant and Snow, and me. Ah, those were the days!

Jennifer Jaimes, Esquire
Jennifer Jaimes Esquire
Jaimes Legal, LLC
Baltimore, MD

Happy Mothers’ Day and Due Process Forever!😎👍🥇

PWS

05-10-20