Paulina Vera, Esq.; Professor Alberto Benitez; Rachel Petterson
Friends,Please join me in congratulating S-P-G-G, from El Salvador, whose asylum application was granted by IJ David Crosland on February 26. We received the decision today. When told of the grant, S-P-G-G screamed. She can start the process of bringing her minor son to the USA. Please also join me in congratulating Rachael Petterson, Julia Navarro, Solangel González, Chen Liang, Xinyuan Li, Abril Costanza Lara, Allison Mateo, and Paulina Vera, who worked on this case.The IJ found that S-P-G-G warranted humanitarian asylum because she established compelling reasons arising from the severity of her persecution. Among other things, she had been raped by her sister’s ex-boyfriend, which resulted in her becoming pregnant, and giving the child up for adoption. S-P-G-G testified that she experiences recurring nightmares, suicidal feelings, a sense of hopelessness, and fear as a result of her persecution.FYI. The client’s initial hearing was on December 18, 2012, IJ Crosland denied asylum, she appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which remanded to the IJ, he denied asylum again, she appealed to the BIA, which denied asylum, she appealed to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which remanded to the IJ, and he finally granted asylum on February 26.
**************************************************
Alberto Manuel Benitez
Professor of Clinical Law
Director, Immigration Clinic
The George Washington University Law School
- The absolute BS of those like Sessions and other restrictionists who say asylum cases can be raced through the system on an assembly line;
- The further BS of claiming that asylum applicants and their lawyers are “gaming” the system when many delays, like this, are caused by poor anti-asylum decision-making within EOIR combined with the DOJ’s incompetent administration of the Immigration Courts;
- The importance of full appellate rights, including review by a U.S. Court of Appeals that is actually an independent, fair, and impartial court, not a Government agency masquering as a court;
- The absurdity of claiming that unrepresented asylum seekers can receive anything approaching Due Process in the EOIR system, particularly when they are held in inherently coercive “civil immigration detention.”
What if we had a fair, expert Immigration Court system that made every effort to do right by asylum seekers in the first instance by interpreting and applying the law in the generous and humanitarian manner to protect those in need as originally intended in the Refugee Act of 1980 and described by the Supremes in Cardoza-Fonseca?
What if we had a Government that cared about Due Process and worked to promote it rather than attempting to whack it out of shape to screw the most vulnerable among us at every opportunity?
What if the emphasis in the Immigration Courts was on fairness, scholarship, respect, and teamwork with all concerned (not just “partnership” with the prosecutor and politicized Administration goals) rather than on “haste makes waste” methods and gimmicks.
Hey, we could have a working court system where justice was served and more things got done right in the first place, instead of the disgraceful mess that EOIR has become under DOJ’s highly politicized mismanagement!
PWS
03-07-19