sra_law

BREAKING NEWS: Trump Takes Action Immigration, Ends CPB One: George Rodriguez Interview with NBC 5

Thu, 06 Feb 2025 21:11:27 GMT

This is a subtitle for your new post

In a recent development that has taken the nation by storm, President Trump announced a sweeping change to the United States' immigration policy by declaring a border emergency and subsequently putting an end to the CBP One application process. This decision has left countless migrants in a state of uncertainty and has thrown a wrench in the operations of immigration attorneys across the country.

To provide our clients and the wider community with expert insight into these sudden changes, our managing partner and esteemed immigration lawyer, George Rodriguez, was featured in an interview on NBC 5 on January 21, 2025, at 8:53 am . During this pivotal discussion, he dissected the implications of the President’s actions and what it means for immigrants and their families.

Impact on Immigrants and Legal Processes

With the termination of the CBP One application, a tool designed to streamline the scheduling of appointments and processing at the border, migrants looking to enter the U.S. are now facing even more hurdles. This abrupt policy shift not only complicates the legal entry process but also adds layers of uncertainty and stress for vulnerable individuals seeking refuge and a better life in the United States.

What This Means Going Forward

In his interview, George Rodriguez delves into the consequences of halting the CBP One application and the broader ramifications of declaring a border emergency. He emphasizes the increased challenges that immigration attorneys will face as they navigate these new obstacles alongside their clients.

Furthermore, Rodriguez offers key advice to those affected by the recent changes, outlining potential strategies and steps to consider in light of the current immigration landscape. His insights provide a beacon of hope and guidance during a time of significant upheaval and confusion.

Our Commitment to You

At SRA Law Firm, we understand how critical it is to stay informed and prepared, especially when facing such fundamental changes to immigration policy. We stand by our commitment to offer unwavering support and expert legal advice to our clients and the community during these tumultuous times.

To those affected by the end of CBP One and the declaration of a border emergency, we are here to help guide you through the complexities of the new regulatory environment. Our team, led by seasoned immigration lawyers like George Rodriguez, is dedicated to fighting for your rights and working tirelessly to achieve the best possible outcome for your case.

For further details on how these changes may affect your circumstances or to schedule a consultation, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Stay informed,

The SRA Law Firm Team

BREAKING IMMIGRATION NEWS: U.S. extends protected migrant status to mid-2024 for 6 nationalities

cris@brightsocialagency.com (Cris Haest) — Fri, 11 Nov 2022 18:31:04 GMT

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) will be extended to June 30, 2024, for citizens of Haiti, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Sudan, Honduras, and Nepal

"The Temporary Protected Status (TPS) will be extended to June 30, 2024, for citizens of Haiti, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Sudan, Honduras, and Nepal, according to a document filed by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

The action means their status will no longer expire at the end of the year.

The TPS program provides recipients work permits and can protect them from deportation if their home countries go through extraordinary events such as natural disaster or armed conflict.

The extension will affect about 392,000 people, of whom some 242,000 are citizens of El Salvador, according to USCIS data.

"Thanks be to God," said Salvadoran Ambassador to the United States Milena Mayorga, tweeting a link to the document.

The extension gives Hondurans in the program "peace of mind for another 18 months," Honduran Foreign Minister Eduardo Reina said at a news conference."

Click to read the full article published on reuters.com

"We welcome this great news, but we really need to work for a permanent solution for TPS, DACA and farmworkers." - George Rodriguez

BREAKING NEWS: DHS Publishes Final Rule to Restore Asylum Regulations Consistent with Asylumworks Vacatur

cris@brightsocialagency.com (Cris Haest) — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 20:26:00 GMT

WHAT THIS MEANS:

We no longer have to wait for an asylum application to be pending 365 days before applying for work authorization.

The rules were changed back to 180 days instead.

SUMMARY:

This final rule removes changes to regulatory text resulting from two final rules issued in June 2020, which were vacated by a Federal district court in February 2022. This final rule implements the vacatur by removing certain regulatory text governing asylum applications, interviews, and eligibility for employment authorization and an employment authorization document (EAD) based on a pending asylum application. It also reinserts various regulatory provisions as they appeared prior to the effective dates of the two final rules issued in June 2020.

DATES:

This rule is effective on February 7, 2022, as a result of the Federal district court's vacatur.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rená Cutlip-Mason, Chief, Division of Humanitarian Affairs, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 5900 Capital Gateway Drive, Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009; telephone (240) 721-3000 (not a toll-free call).

FROM U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) today announced publication of a final rule consistent with the vacatur of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Asylumworks et al. v. Mayorkas et al. This final rule is effective starting Feb. 7, 2022.

In June 2020, DHS issued two final rules, titled Removal of 30-Day Processing Provision for Asylum Applicant-Related Form I-765 Employment Authorization Applications (Timeline Repeal rule) and Asylum Application, Interview, and Employment Authorization for Applicants (Broader Asylum EAD rule).

On Feb. 7, 2022, the federal district court vacated the Timeline Repeal rule and Broader Asylum EAD rule. Effective Feb. 8, USCIS stopped applying these rules to asylum applicants. We instead are applying the provisions in place before the rules took effect in August 2020. See 8 CFR §§ 208 and 274a. This applies to adjudication of Form I-589, Application for Asylum and Withholding of Removal , and Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization , pending with USCIS as of Feb. 8, 2022, or received on or after that date.

Consistent with the Asylumworks vacatur, this final rule removes certain regulatory text governing asylum applications, interviews, and eligibility for employment authorization based on a pending asylum application. We have restored the relevant regulatory text to appear as it did before the effective dates of the vacated rules.

George Rodriguez Receives the 2022 State Bar of Texas' Mentorship Award for the Immigration & Nationality Section!

cris@brightsocialagency.com (Cris Haest) — Tue, 23 Aug 2022 23:03:09 GMT

Congratulations to our own George Rodriguez on receiving the State Bar of Texas' Mentorship Award for the Immigration & Nationality Section!

George was recently announced as a 2022 honoree from the State Bar of Texas' Immigration & Nationality Section for the Mentorship Award.

From the announcement by Chair Roy Petty:

"George has the answers. For years he has guided attorneys in resolving detention and removal matters. George served for more than 14 years as the AILA liaison to Dallas ICE. He frequently speaks on immigration law topics, including advising lesser experienced attorneys to represent their clients effectively and ethically. George has taught immigration law at SMU Dedman School of Law. He serves on the Board of the National Hispanic Institute and the Bishop’s Immigration Taskforce. He is the Co-chair of the Bachman Lake Together Board. He is one of the founders of the BeGolden Journey campaign which promotes treating immigrants with dignity and compassion. And, he still finds the time to answer questions of fellow attorneys."

Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez – Saenz-Rodriguez & Associates – Immigration Lawyers Serving Dallas & Fort Worth for More Than 20 Years

cris@brightsocialagency.com (Cris Haest) — Mon, 27 Jun 2022 17:16:00 GMT

"Success means striking the perfect balance between being a business owner, parent, spouse and humanitarian."

- Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez

The majority of executives use stories to persuade and communicate in the workplace. Can you share with our readers examples of how you implement that in your business to communicate effectively with your team?

Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez: I work in the immigration law space. As an immigration lawyer, my job is to tell the stories of the people I represent every single day. The work that we do in our office will impact lives on a monumental scale. It is important that each person on our team understand what role they play in making that happen for the people that we serve. When our team know the underlying story and what is at stake in our cases, they become stakeholders in the work that we do and the effort rises to a level of personal importance. When the client wins, we all win and that win is celebrated by the entire team because it takes everyone to make it happen. As the lawyer, I am the one in the courtroom, but all the ground work is done by the team way before I ever set foot in that courthouse.

The Department of Homeland Security Announced the Designation of Ukraine for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for 18 months.

Fri, 04 Mar 2022 15:05:38 GMT

Secretary Mayorkas Designates Ukraine for Temporary Protected Status for 18 Months

The Office of Public Affairs provided further definition in an email release: "A country may be designated for TPS when conditions in the country fall into one or more of the three statutory bases for designation: ongoing armed conflict, environmental disasters, or extraordinary and temporary conditions. This designation is based on both ongoing armed conflict and extraordinary and temporary conditions in Ukraine that prevent Ukrainian nationals, and those of no nationality who last habitually resided in Ukraine, from returning to Ukraine safely. These conditions result from the full-scale Russian military invasion into Ukraine, which marks the largest conventional military action in Europe since World War II. This invasion has caused a humanitarian crisis with significant numbers of individuals fleeing and damage to civilian infrastructure that has left many without electricity or water or access to food, basic supplies, shelter, and emergency medical services."

"Individuals eligible for TPS under this designation must have continuously resided in the United States since March 1, 2022. Individuals who attempt to travel to the United States after March 1, 2022 will not be eligible for TPS. Ukraine’s 18-month designation will go into effect on the publication date of the forthcoming Federal Register notice. The Federal Register notice will provide instructions for applying for TPS and an Employment Authorization Document (EAD). TPS applicants must meet all eligibility requirements and undergo security and background checks."

If you are seeking Temporary Protected Status into America, we have legal experts available to help you navigate the United States Immigration system. Please call us at 214-637-5700 now to schedule a consultation. We are here to help.

What is Political Asylum in the USA?

Fri, 17 Sep 2021 14:09:57 GMT

What is Political Asylum in the USA?

If you have a relative or friend who is applying for political asylum in the United States, it is in your best interest to find out as much as you can about the process so that you can prepare yourself in case there are changes to how this option will be considered. The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) provides important information on what to expect when dealing with U.S. Immigration authorities. You can also find out about resources available for people wishing to aid those seeking political asylum .

What is political asylum?

According to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (aka the Hart-Celler Act), anyone who fled their home or place of employment due to political persecution can apply for political asylum. This means that if you're a U.S. citizen and feel that your life would be in danger if you returned to your home country, you may be able to apply for political asylum. The law also states that if your life would be in danger if you returned to your home country, then you must apply for political asylum within one year of leaving.

Are you a political refugee?

Are you in the United States, seeking political asylum? If you are, you need to understand what options are available to you and what your options are. Before you arrive in the United States (or any other country for that matter), it is important to understand what type of protection you may receive. This information is crucial in helping you understand how to choose a potential asylum vacation from the many choices available to you.

Some people have valid reasons to fear persecution if they return to their home country. For example, a person might fear persecution for his or her political beliefs. Or, a family member might fear being returned to a country where he or she fears violence or oppression. The potential risk of persecution creates a healthy incentive to apply for political asylum. However, if you are unable to satisfy the requirements for political asylum within the United States, you may still be able to obtain political asylum from another country.

The U.S. government is authorized to protect individuals from persecution if they face certain risk of returning to their home country. If an individual has a close family member who could flee the country if necessary, or if he or she has a property or business there that might be considered a risk to national security or economic well-being, then an asylum case may be filed. An application for political asylum must be made in person at one of the four federal immigration centers: Los Angeles, Buffalo, Chicago or San Francisco. If someone feels they may be persecuted for their political beliefs or religion please feel free to contact us for more information.

How do I get political asylum in the USA?

The rules regarding political asylum are very strict in the United States. Even if you are a person with a well documented, valid claim for political persecution, it may be years before you see a decision from the US government if you will be granted political asylum. You should always represent yourself with the assistance of an immigration attorney prior to filing a formal asylum claim. You should also keep in mind that in some situations, even if you have been persecuted for your political beliefs, the US government may not want you to return to your home country or even continue living in the United States.

What is the process for Political Asylum in the USA?

There are two primary ways in which a person may apply for asylum in the United States: the affirmative process and the defensive process.

The affirmative process is when a person submits an application to the US government, on their own behalf and with the consent of their country, on conditions likely to encourage their asylum claim.
The defensive process is initiated by someone close to the applicant, usually a family member or friend. Depending on the circumstances of the claim, this can either be an extended period of time, a formal hearing before an immigration judge (known as an immigration hearing), or a formal decision from the government accepting the applicant as a political refugee.

Asylum seekers who arrive at a U.S. port of entry or enter the United States without inspection generally must apply through the defensive asylum process. Both asylum application processes require the asylum seeker to be physically present in the United States.

What Documents do I need for a Political Asylum application?

When preparing your application for USCIS, our immigration experts help ensure you have all of the required documents including:

two sets of Form I-589 (the original you filled out, plus one copy)
For the Form I-589, you will need quote a bit of information:
your physical address in the U.S. (plus the ZIP code if it's larger than 1,000),
your date of birth,
both your signed copies of the returns (our immigration experts will assist with this step),
a notarized statement from a physician attesting to your physical and mental health conditions,
your signature, and a proof of legal presence if you submitted one last year.
You also may want to submit biometrics (such as a fingerprint) if applying by mail.
one recent passport-size photograph of you
two copies of any passport that you have and of any U.S. immigration documents (such as your I-94 Arrival/Departure Record)
two copies of other identification documents that you have, such as your birth certificate, national identity card, or driver's license, and
fee ($50 on or after October 2, 2020).

Since USCIS will probably never return the documents included in your political asylum application, we never include originals of the immigration or identity documents. Instead, once your asylum interview is scheduled we'll remind you to bring all original documents, where the Asylum Officer can examine them in person.

Working with Saenz-Rodriguez and Associates, we also help clients prepare the following to include in the Political Asylum application:

one original and one copy of your declaration
one original and one copy of declarations from friends or family who witnessed how you were harmed or threatened in your home country
one original and one copy of an expert declaration from a medical expert who has examined you for evidence of physical abuse you suffered in your country
one original and one copy of an expert declaration from a psychologist or psychiatrist who has examined you for evidence of emotional problems you are suffering as a result of harm you suffered in your country
one original and one copy of an expert declaration from a human rights activist or an academic who is familiar with human rights abuses in your country
one original and one copy of country-conditions reports and any news clippings explaining human rights abuses in your country and what had happened to you
any other materials that confirm what had happened to you in your home country, including photographs that show how you were harmed, threatening letters, newspaper articles describing how you were harmed, official government documents, and so forth.
a cover letter, listing what's in the application and mentioning any special requests; see, for example, Can I Ask for a Female Asylum Officer and Interpreter?

Once your political asylum application is completed, we then make an additional copy of everything for your own records, (and one for ours).

How Long Does the Asylum Process Take?

The asylum process can take years to conclude. In some cases, a person may file his or her application or pass a credible or reasonable fear screening and receive a hearing or interview date years in the future. The length of time can vary depending on the type of claim being filed (for example, a refugee vs permissive status request), the number of applicants awaiting decision or approval, and other factors. Some people have been in the country for as long as 20 years without gaining legal status but may still be waiting on a decision from an immigration official or other third party.

From the American Immigration Council's FACT SHEET Asylum in the United States :

As of September 2019, there were 339,836 affirmative asylum applications pending with USCIS. The government does not estimate the time it will take to schedule an initial interview for these asylum applicants, though historically the delay could reach four years.
The backlog in U.S. immigration courts reached an all-time high in April 2020, with over 1.17 million open removal cases. On average, these cases had been pending for 734 days and remained unresolved.
Individuals with an immigration court case who were ultimately granted relief—such as asylum—by February 2020 waited more than 930 days on average for that outcome. Illinois and Virginia had the longest wait times, averaging 1,300 days until relief was granted in the immigration case.

Political asylum is a protection from prosecution in the United States as a result of advocating or taking part in activities intended to overthrow the government or carrying out a hostile act toward the United States or its forces. This protection is available to individuals regardless of their immigration status or whether they have been living in the United States since before January 1, 1952. If you are facing a serious criminal charge or threat to life, health or property in the United States, contact Saenz-Rodriguez & Associates now to make an application for political asylum.

USCIS Breaking News: COVID-19 Vaccination Required for Immigration Medical Examinations Ex

Wed, 15 Sep 2021 17:49:19 GMT

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:

COVID-19 Vaccination Required for Immigration Medical Examinations

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced that, effective Oct. 1, 2021, applicants subject to the immigration medical examination must be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 before the civil surgeon can complete an immigration medical examination and sign Form I-693, Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination Record .

We are updating our policy guidance in accordance with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Aug. 17, 2021 update to the Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons . That update requires applicants subject to the immigration medical examination to complete the COVID-19 vaccine series (one or two doses, depending on the vaccine) and provide documentation of vaccination to the civil surgeon before completion of the immigration medical examination. This requirement is effective Oct. 1, 2021, and applies prospectively to all Forms I-693 signed by the civil surgeons on or after that date. We are working on updating Form I-693 and the form instructions to incorporate this new requirement.

In general, individuals applying to become a lawful permanent resident, and other applicants as deemed necessary, must undergo an immigration medical examination to show they are free from any conditions that would render them inadmissible under the health-related grounds. USCIS designates eligible physicians as civil surgeons to perform this immigration medical examination for applicants within the United States and to document the results of the immigration medical examination on the Form I-693.

USCIS may grant blanket waivers if the COVID-19 vaccine is:

Not age-appropriate;
Contraindicated due to a medical condition;
Not routinely available where the civil surgeon practices; or
Limited in supply and would cause significant delay for the applicant to receive the vaccination.

Individuals may also apply for individual waivers based on religious beliefs or moral convictions by submitting Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility .

For more information, see the policy alert from USCIS.

Pathway to Citizenship in Build Back Better Reconciliation: House Judiciary Committee Legislative Text Fact Sheet

Mon, 13 Sep 2021 16:37:56 GMT

HAPPENING TODAY

WATCH NOW:

The House Judiciary Committee will be marking up their legislative proposal for the $107.5 billion instruction included in reconciliation for a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, TPS holders and essential workers on Monday, September 13th . After markup, this legislative text will be combined with the overall Build Back Better reconciliation bill and will be voted on the House floor then sent to the Senate for additional consideration and potentially additional amendments to the immigration provisions.

The legislation includes three major parts: (1) pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, TPS, DED holders, farm workers and other essential workers; (2) recapture of unused green cards for family and employment- based visas and Diversity Visa and (3) funding for USCIS. Additionally, there are provisions that expedite the processing of green card applications and that increase various immigration benefit fees. Finally, the bill provides funding for DOJ community intervention programs.

Provides a Pathway to Citizenship for Dreamers, TPS, DED holders, Farmworkers and other Essential Workers. The immigration provisions in the reconciliation bill being marked up in the House Judiciary Committee would allow approximately 8 million people to qualify for green cards, 7 million of those undocumented individuals, DACA recipients, and TPS holders, and the remaining 1 million individuals currently have nonimmigrant status. The fee to apply for a green card in these categories is $1,500.00

Dreamers

Physical presence in the U.S. on January 1, 2021;
18 years old or younger on the initial date of entry into the U.S.; and either:

Has a record of honorable service in the Uniformed Services of the U.S.,
Has attained a degree from a higher education institution or a postsecondary credential from an area career and technical education school, or has completed at least two years of a program,
Can demonstrate consistent earned income over the 3 years before application, or
Is enrolled in a higher education institution of a postsecondary program and is currently employed or participating in an internship, apprenticeship or similar program.

Children enrolled in school (pre-school or K-12) will have a stay of removal until they can qualify for adjustment of status under the bill.

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) Holders

Continuous physical presence in the U.S. for at least 3 years;
Had TPS or was eligible for TPS on January 1, 2017; DED as January 20, 2021
Has not engaged in conduct that would make an individual ineligible for TPS or DED.

Farm Workers and other Essential Workers

Continuous physical presence in the U.S. since January 1, 2021; and
A consistent record of earned income in an occupation described in the Aug 10, 2021 DHS memo titled ‘ Advisory Memorandum on Identification of Essential Critical Infrastructure Workers During COVID–19 Response , during the period beginning on January 31, 2020, and ending on August 24, 2021.
Essential workers that fit under the DHS definition are those who perform a range of operations and services the government deems essential to continued critical infrastructure operations, such as staffing, maintaining, and repairing operations and supply chains. It includes healthcare workers, first responders, farm workers, culinary workers, domestic workers, home care workers, janitors, food processors and deliverers, and others that are specifically delineated in the DHS memo.

Ineligibility Criteria

The ineligibility bars and waivers in this legislative text mirror those in the bipartisan Senate Dream Act, S.264.
If an individual has committed certain crimes, were a security risk, or were inadmissible or removable on certain other grounds.

Recapture of Unused Green Cards, Restoring the Availability of Immigrant Visas

Recapturing unused visas

Recaptures the visas lost due to technical slow processing or other issues going back to 1992, restoring around 500,00 unused visas as Congress previously intended this system to work.
This will help alleviate existing family and employment visa backlogs, the majority of the recaptured visas will go to family-based visas.

Diversity Visa

Offer diversity visas to people who were selected in the diversity visa lottery but denied visas due to Muslim, Africa and Immigrant travel bans and COVID-19 related disruption.
Diversity Visa applicants who were selected but unable to claim visa due to the Muslim Ban will have the ability to reapply

Investment in U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Includes $2.8 billion to increase capacity at USCIS to support the adjudication of applications and reduce processing backlogs.

Summary: What is Happening with the DHS Enforcement Priorities?

Fri, 27 Aug 2021 16:23:50 GMT

From the Immigrant Legal Resource Center

What is Happening with the DHS Enforcement Priorities?

On August 19, a federal court in Texas issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in Texas v. United States , after a lawsuit was filed by the states of Texas and Louisiana in an effort to force the government back into Trump-era immigration tactics to detain and deport people en masse by making everyone a priority. The preliminary injunction had temporarily stopped the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from using the interim enforcement priority guidelines outlined in the January 20th “ Pekoske Memo ” and the guidance fleshed out in Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) February 18th “ Johnson Memo .” The Texas court had ordered DHS to stop all implementation of these memos.

Together, these memos had created three categories of people to be prioritized for enforcement-related actions if they were deemed to be either a 1) national security, 2) border security, or 3) public safety threat. If a person fell outside of these categories, ICE officers were directed to use prosecutorial discretion to avoid taking enforcement action to issue detainers, make immigration arrests, initiate removal proceedings, detain or release someone, execute removal orders, or similar actions. In addition, ICE’s Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (the ICE attorneys who prosecute cases in immigration court) issued a memo on how ICE attorneys should exercise prosecutorial discretion under the interim priorities in the context of removal proceedings.

On August 23, the judge issued a clarifying order and stayed (suspended) the decision for one week to allow the federal government to appeal. On August 25, the Fifth Circuit temporarily stayed the injunction until further notice.

Other states, including Florida and Arizona, had previously filed lawsuits challenging the enforcement priorities guidance as well. In those cases, the judges at the federal district court level held that the DHS enforcement priorities guidance was lawful. Those lawsuits remain pending before the 11th and 9th circuits.

This means that for now, the Enforcement Priorities are still in effect, although a change could come within the next few weeks.

TAKEAWAY: As of August 26, the injunction is stayed (suspended) and the Enforcement Priorities are still in effect. Advocates and practitioners can and should continue pursuing prosecutorial discretion and challenging ICE decisions via the ICE case review process or in immigration court and via advocacy with local ICE field offices based on the Pekoske, Johnson, and OPLA memos.

What is Prosecutorial Discretion and What does it Mean Moving Forward?

Prosecutorial discretion refers to the decision of whether or not to arrest, detain, or deport someone (among other enforcement actions), and is an inherent power that has been used by ICE for decades. In other words, DHS is not required to arrest/detain/try to deport every removable noncitizen, and they frequently exercise discretion regarding whom they target and whom they do not.

In the August 23 order , the Texas court clarified that the decision did not require the prosecution, removal, or detention of any person. This means that if the enforcement priorities outlined in the Pekoske or Johnson memos are taken away at a later date, ICE still retains the ability to use their general prosecutorial discretion in individual cases. Meanwhile, because the Fifth Circuit has temporarily stayed the injunction, DHS should continue to follow these memos for now. But it remains to be seen what further guidance DHS may provide to ICE field offices. The preliminary injunction also does not affect the authority of immigration judges.

The Administration had originally announced that they would issue final enforcement priorities in April, although this timeline was pushed back to late August or September. It seems unlikely that the administration will now come out with new priorities until the litigation has been resolved. However, on August 11, ICE issued new policy guidance about prosecutorial discretion for people who are victims of crimes . Because this policy was not based on the Pekoske and Johnson memos enjoined by the court, we believe this policy is unaffected by the injunction.

Unprecedented & Dangerous Ruling by Federal Judge

Fri, 20 Aug 2021 19:20:35 GMT

Immigration Lawyers Say Trump-Appointed Judge in Texas Just Decided He’s in Control of ICE and ‘Emperor of U.S. Immigration Policy’ in ‘Unprecedented and Outrageous’ Ruling

MSN Reports:

U.S. District Judge Drew B. Tipton, appointed by then-President Donald Trump in 2020, authored the order enjoining two immigration memos issued on Jan. 20 and Feb. 18 by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and ICE directors, respectively.

Collectively, those two memos generally established a return to the enforcement priorities of the Obama administration–instructing government agents to arrest and detain immigrants considered public safety and/or national security threats. Specifically, ICE agents were directed to focus on three tiers of deportation priorities:

(1) undocumented immigrants who are deemed to be or who are suspected of being a national security threat;

(2) undocumented immigrants who entered or attempted to enter the country “on or aft

er November 1, 2020;” and

(3) undocumented immigrants convicted of certain felony and gang-related offenses.

With the issuance of his sprawling, 160-page opinion and order , however, Tipton wiped away all of ICE’s enforcement priorities.

To view the original published content click here .

"This unprecedented and dangerous ruling by a Federal Judge who has been on the bench for less than a year flies in the face of any concept of separation of powers. In essence, Judge Tipton appointed himself the "Immigration Czar" of ICE and limited their ability to make any independent decisions as an agency. "

- Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez,

Immigration Lawyer

Practice Alert from American Immigration Lawyers Association: Contact Information for Afghan Evacuation Operations

Fri, 20 Aug 2021 15:40:09 GMT

Do you need immigration assistance? Call or contact our offices to schedule a consultation with our immigration law firm.

AILA Doc. No. 21081960 | Dated August 19, 2021

The following may be helpful for individuals seeking to contact the Afghanistan Non-Combatant Evacuation Operation (NEO) for information for Evacuees and Commercial Aircraft Coordination.

For information on evacuation guidance/support from the Department of State (DOS) Afghanistan Coordination Task Force (ACTF) for evacuation guidance/support contact:

Primary: 1-888-407-4747 (May only be called from a U.S. phone number)
Alternate: 1-202-501-4444 (May be called from an overseas number)
Email: ACTF@state.gov
Additional assistance: 1-202-485-1888 or 1-202-485-1627

For additional assistance, the Department of Defense (DoD) has established an Afghanistan NEO Call Center (ANCC) to assist with logistics that can be reached at 1-703-693-0799 .

For information on chartered or commercial flights out of Hamid Karzai International Airport (HKIA), contact:

Cite as AILA Doc. No. 21081960.

BREAKING IMMIGRATION NEWS: Federal Judge in Texas Decision to Suspend DACA

Fri, 16 Jul 2021 23:03:03 GMT

Judge orders U.S. to close Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program to new applicants prohibited from approving first-time DACA requests

A federal judge in Texas ruled today that DACA, the Obama-era program shielding certain undocumented immigrants from deportation, is illegal and halted all new applicants. While it does not cancel hundreds of thousands of people with current permits, it does effectively block tens of thousands of immigrant teenagers and young adults from accessing the Obama-era legal protections.

“While the continuing use of young aspiring Americans as a political tool is not a surprise, it is now more critical than ever that Congress take action to protect the hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients.” - Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez

According to immigration reporter Camilo Montoya-Galvez with CBS News , “Judge Hanen, who was appointed to the federal bench by former President George W. Bush, has given DHSgov three days to post a notice on its websites saying that DACA was found to be illegal and that the government is prohibited from approving first-time DACA requests.”

DALLAS TEXAS IMMLAW MEMBERSHIP Feature

Tue, 13 Jul 2021 10:30:02 GMT

Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez Accepts IMMLAW Invitation

"Becoming part of IMMLAW has proven to be much more than just being part of one of the most distinguished immigration lawyers in the field. It is the place where I get to collaborate with the best of the best to analyze, assess and strategize in real time as immigration policy is changing. We don’t have to wait to see what the experts think because we are the experts. I am proud to call IMMLAW my professional family." - Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez

IMMLAW Membership Feature Excerpt

"MICHELLE L. SAENZ-RODRIGUEZ is the co-founder of Saenz-Rodriguez & Associates in Dallas, Texas. Now in her 30th year of practice, Michelle is Board Certified in Immigration and Nationality Law by the State Bar of Texas. She started as a Judicial Law Clerk under the Attorney General’s Honor Program for 7 Immigration Judges in Harlingen, Texas. She began her immigration practice shortly thereafter and has remained a passionate advocate for immigrants from around the world.

Michelle is former Chair for the Texas Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers. She currently sits on the AILA Board of Governors and is on the AILA ICE Liaison Committee. Michelle also sits as an Advisory Member of the ABA Commission on Immigration. Saenz-Rodriguez & Associates has been has been named one of the “Top Tier Immigration Law Firms in America” for the last several years and being named “Top Lawyer in the Field of Immigration for 2018” by Best Lawyers in America. In 2020, Michelle received The W Page Keeton Award for Excellence in Continuing Legal Education from the University of Texas Law School."

What is IMMLAW?

From the IMMLAW website :

"IMMLAW was established 30 years ago as a consortium of prominent, highly experienced immigration lawyers strategically located in centers of business and economic growth and major gateway cities throughout the country.

IMMLAW attorneys are recognized as top attorneys, being listed in some of the world's most established ranking services for immigration lawyers, including Best Lawyers in America, Martindale Hubbell AV and Preeminent ratings, International Who's Who of Business Immigration Lawyers, and Super Lawyers, as well as by peers.

IMMLAW attorneys are leaders. Our members have served on the Board of Governors of AILA (the American Immigration Lawyers Association) as officers and directors, AILA is the bar association for immigration lawyers, with 15,000-members in the U.S. and around the world. A number of our members have served as AILA national President, a nationally elected, top position within the bar association.

IMMLAW attorneys have served on various federal government agency liaison committees through AILA and other bar associations and organizations. Our members include national leaders, well-known authors, professors, and lecturers in immigration law.

IMMLAW attorneys serve the immigrant community and work with other professional and government groups. Our members support and volunteer at agencies that serve the immigrant community through charitable and pro-bono efforts.

IMMLAW attorneys are dedicated to advancing the profession of immigration law by utilizing our combined knowledge base and pooled resources. We strive to increase public awareness in the immigration community and to the public at-large. This is accomplished through frequent participation and speaking engagements at immigration law conferences, business seminars, and public presentations and through book authorship, articles, commentary, and editorial input of numerous books and articles in professional journals and online publications.

IMMLAW is reserved for the best of the best, and membership is by-invitation only."

Can Temporary Protected Status (TPS) Lead to Adjustment of Status (aka “Green Card”)?

Fri, 09 Jul 2021 22:52:32 GMT

Can TPS status lead to adjustment of status (a “green card”)?

This year the U.S. Supreme took on a case involving an employment-based application for a green card or an adjustment of status for a couple who have Temporary Protective Status (TPS). The Court decided in Sanchez v. Mayorkas, 593 U.S. ___ (2021) that someone in TPS status who originally entered the US without inspection (illegally) cannot adjustment status.

The issue is not whether TPS alone can lead to a green card. TPS is a temporary status providing individuals from certain designated countries to live and work in the United States. TPS is a humanitarian immigration policy for foreign nationals in the United States who cannot return to their home countries because of armed conflict, natural disaster, pandemic, or similar extraordinary conditions. See , 8 U.S.C. 1254(a) Recently, Venezuelans in the United States were allowed to apply for TPS. Others, such as Salvadorans, have had the ability to maintain TPS status for years.

Prior to this decision several federal circuits courts were split as to whether a TPS recipient could adjust status to a legal permanent resident based on a qualifying family relationship or qualifying employment petition. The US immigration laws allow for individuals who have been “ inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States ” to adjust status in the United States. INA 245(a); 8 USC §1255(a) The argument was that by submitting an application for Temporary Protective Status and having that application adjudicated and approved, the TPS recipient had been “admitted and inspected” as required by law. To support that argument, TPS recipients pointed to the TPS law itself which states:

“(f)Benefits and status during period of temporary protected status During a period in which an alien is granted temporary protected status under this section—

(4) for purposes of adjustment of status under section 1255 of this title and change of status under section 1258 of this title , the alien shall be considered as being in, and maintaining, lawful status as a nonimmigrant .” (Emphasis added) 8 USC §1254(a)(f)(4)

In the Third, the Fifth, and Eleventh Circuits the decision was that TPS does not fulfill the requirements of being admitted and inspected. In the Eleventh Circuit the court determined that “’lawful status as a nonimmigrant’ for purposes of adjusting his status does not change §1255(a)’s threshold requirement that he is eligible for adjustment of status only if he was initially inspected and admitted or paroled.” Serrano v. United States Attorney General , 655 F. 3d 1260, 1265 (11th Cir. 2011) (per curiam). In our own Fifth Circuit the court determined that there is no “fictional new entry” created by the grant of TPS. Melendez v McAleenan, 928 F. 3d 425, 427-429 (5th Cir. 2019) cert. denied , 140 S. Ct. 561 (2019). In June 2021, the Supreme Court agreed that the grant of TPS does not cure the initial unlawful entry and therefore, a TPS holder cannot adjust status in the United States.

However, in a footnote in Sanchez v. Mayorkas, the Supreme Court did clarify that they had not addressed the issue of whether a TPS holder who had traveled and returned with advance parole would be eligible for adjustment of status. This is an important point in this matter.

Those who have been granted Temporary Protective Status have the ability to apply for advance parole, which is permission to return to the United States after travel abroad. Section 245(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that those who are allowed to adjust status are individuals who were “inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States ”. It makes sense that if a TPS holder has traveled and returned with an advanced parole that they should be eligible to adjust status.

However, starting sometime around 2019 some USCIS field offices began to deny adjustment of status applications for TPS holders who had traveled and returned on an advance parole. In some instances, Legal Permanent Residents who had TPS and adjusted status based on travel on an advance parole were being issued denials of naturalization. The naturalization denials were being issued with Notices to Appear based on findings that LPR status was procured unlawfully!

Instead, USCIS began to cite MTINA §304(c) as the basis for their denials which states:

(1) In the case of a[] [noncitizen] described in paragraph (2) [covering, inter alia, TPS beneficiaries] whom the Attorney General authorizes to travel abroad temporarily and who returns to the United States in accordance with such authorization-

(A) the [noncitizen] shall be inspected and admitted in the same

immigration status [he or she] had at the time of departure

if-

(ii) in the case of a[] [noncitizen] described in

paragraph [(c)](2)(B) [TPS beneficiaries], [he or

she] is found not to be excludable on a ground of

exclusion referred to in section 244A(c)(2)(A)(iii)

of the Immigration and Nationality Act ....

MTINA § 304(c), Pub. L. No. 102-232, 105 Stat. at 1749 (emphasis added)

The interpretation offered by USCIS in issuing the Denials and Notices of Intent to Deny is that when a TPS holder departs the US with a § 244(f)(3) advance parole they return to the US in the same status they had prior to departure – but, meaning that they revert to the status they had when they first entered the United States. The USCIS Policy Manual, vol. 7, pt. B, ch. 2, § A.5 states:

“Since the purpose of Section 304(c) of the Miscellaneous and Technical Immigration and Nationality Amendments Act of 1991 (MTINA) is to return the TPS beneficiary to the “same immigration status the alien had at the time of departure,” this provision of MTINA “cannot be interpreted to put TPS recipients in a better position than they had been upon their physical departure from the United States[.] The TPS beneficiary’s travel and return “does not alter their immigration status for purposes of adjustment of status[.]””

It continues to state that a § 244(f)(3) advance parole is a matter of an administrative convenience – a form of maintaining a record of arrival:

“When DHS provides prior consent to a TPS beneficiary for his or her travel abroad , it documents that consent by providing an advance parole document (Form I-512) to the alien, as required by regulation. DHS issues an advance parole document for this purpose solely as a matter of administrative convenience. TPS travel authorization is unique and affords the TPS beneficiary only what is provided for under MTINA by restoring the alien to “the same immigration status the alien had at the time of departure.” The travel authorization for the TPS beneficiary allows the alien “to return to the United States in a procedurally regular fashion after foreign travel[.]” However, “[a] status quo ante return cannot create a condition needed to establish eligibility for a benefit for which the alien” would not have been eligible at the time of departure. TPS beneficiaries who depart and return to the United States with the prior consent of DHS pursuant to INA 244(f)(3) are neither admitted nor paroled upon return, but simply resume the same immigration status they had before departing. “The same immigration status” encompasses not only that status of an alien who may be present without inspection and admission or inspection and parole, but all other legal incidents of status, such as an alien’s status in deportation, exclusion, or removal proceedings.”

On August 20, 2020 USCIS issued Policy Memorandum, PM-602-0179 Matter of Z-R-Z-C- , Adopted Decision 1010-02 (AAO Aug. 20, 2020) addressing the issue of TPS holders who depart on an advance parole and apply for adjustment of status. In the PM, USCIS adopts the AAO decision which continues to interpret MTINA § 304(c) as TPS holders being present in the US without inspection and admission or parole. Furthermore, upon return on advance parole they revert to the status they had when they departed – present without inspection, admission or parole. However, the Z-R-Z-C- Memo ends by stating that it is prospective in its application and allows for the adjustment of status of TPS holders who traveled on advance parole prior to the date of the issuance of the PM on August 20, 2020:

“Recognizing TPS recipients’ reasonable reliance on USCIS’s past practice and treatment of temporary travel abroad, USCIS will limit the application of Matter of Z-R-Z-C- to minimize adverse impacts to this group. Matter of Z-R-Z-C- does not impact TPS recipients who adjusted status to lawful permanent residence under the past practice and/or prior guidance. Such aliens, when applying for naturalization, will not be subject to section 318 of the Act for not having been lawfully admitted as a permanent resident.

In addition, Matter of Z-R-Z-C- ’s holding that a return to the United States pursuant to TPS travel authorization does not satisfy section 245(a) of the Act will only apply prospectively to TPS recipients who departed and returned to the United States pursuant to section 244(f)(3) of the Act after the date of this Adopted Decision.” Id. at 1-2

Whether a TPS recipient is eligible to adjust status having entered with an advance parole continues to be a question of where you live in the United States and your Circuit Court’s views TPS status. Complicating the situation are those who were issued orders of removal or granted Voluntary Removal and were subsequently given TPS status. Can those individuals adjust status if they traveled with advance parole? In the past, we were able to adjust their status. Today, depending in which Circuit you reside the answer will vary. It is always best to consult with a highly experienced immigration attorney who understands the complexities of this issue.

Attorney General vacated two of the most destructive cases in the history of asylum protections

Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:25:31 GMT

Executive Office for Immigration Review Volume 28

"In a pair of decisions announced Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland is vacating several controversial legal rulings issued by his predecessors — in effect, restoring the possibility of asylum protections for women fleeing from domestic violence in other countries, and some victims of gang violence." - NPR reports .

"Today the Attorney General vacated two of the most destructive cases in the history of asylum protections. Its effects will be far-reaching, especially for those whose cases were denied based on previously established “social groups” such as gender-based claims."

BREAKING NEWS: ICE Interim Litigation Position Regarding Motions to Reopen in Light of the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Niz-Chavez v. Garland

Thu, 10 Jun 2021 15:37:17 GMT

BREAKING NEWS from United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Read the full notice from U. S. ICE here: https://www.ice.gov/legal-notices

"Under this interim litigation position, when EOIR grants such a motion to reopen, eligible noncitizens will have an opportunity to present their cancellation of removal claims to an immigration judge and receive a decision on the merits. This position is an example of ICEs expectation that, when exercising their prosecutorial discretion, our immigration attorneys will adhere to the enduring principles that apply to all of their activities: upholding the rule of law; discharging duties ethically in accordance with the law and professional standards of conduct; following the guidelines and strategic directives of senior leadership; and exercising considered judgment and doing justice in individual cases, consistent with agency priorities.

Questions about this litigation position or the process for initiating a joint motion to reopen should be directed to your local ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor field location. " - June 9 U. S. ICE Legal Notice

Interim Policy Marks Significant Step Towards a More Just Immigration System.

Mon, 07 Jun 2021 19:51:45 GMT

Interim Guidance to OPLA Attorneys Regarding Civil Immigration Enforcement and Removal Policies and Priorities

John Trasviña, ICE Principle Legal Advisor, issued the following new memo to ICE OPLA attorneys on May 27th:

Interim Guidance to OPLA Attorneys Regarding Civil Immigration Enforcement and Removal Policies and Priorities

Trasviña instructed his attorneys to follow the Biden administration’s priorities on focusing resources on public safety and national security threats, but also explained that prosecutors should consider an immigrant’s circumstances in cases.

ICE prosecutors are key players in the immigration system as they pursue deportations and make daily decisions on whether certain cases should be dismissed or whether an individual should be released from detention.

Immigration attorneys regularly request cases be delayed, closed, or dismissed in immigration court and prosecutors can choose to support or oppose those efforts as part of their discretion.

DHS officials want the dismissal process to be mostly led by immigration attorneys and their clients, as not everyone wants a case cleared from the court dockets.

What does this mean if you're seeking asylum or permanent status in the United States?

"This interim policy marks a significant step towards a more just immigration system. It will also begin the process of reducing the 1.3 million case backlog in immigration courts."

Is it Possible to Adjust Status Based on TPS?

Thu, 06 May 2021 17:33:03 GMT

Depending on the jurisdiction where you practice the answer can vary.

TPS is provided in limited circumstances to countries designated by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Important to note, it is a humanitarian immigration policy for foreign nationals in the United States who cannot return to their home countries because of armed conflict, natural disaster, pandemic, or similar extraordinary conditions. This is important because if they are not able to adjust status, then the alternati ve would be departing the United States and processing an immigrant visa abroad. Based on the interpretation of the law by some courts of appeal, a TPS holder could trigger penalties that can create a serious impediment to gaining legal permanent residence in the United States. A common scenario is a married TPS couple who have an adult US-born son/daughter and no qualifying relative to waive unlawful presence if they have to undergo consular processing.

Depending on your jurisdiction the ability for a TPS recipient to adjust status may have fluctuated between an affirmative answer and a denial over the past 4 years. This is an attempt to provide an update on what is currently taking place with TPS holders through case law and through USCIS policy. We will also address how traveling on an advance parole may or may not help a TPS holder’s attempt to adjust status.

The issues presented here are:

Does the grant of TPS allow for adjustment of status to someone who first entered the United States without inspection?
2. Does travel on advance parole by a TPS holder who originally entered the United States without inspection allow them to adjust status?
Does travel on advance parole by a TPS holder who originally entered the United States without inspection allow them to adjust status in removal proceedings?

First we have to look at what is required by statute in order to adjust status. The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification as a VAWA self-petitioner may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if (1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment, (2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and (3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.

Second, we have to look at what the Temporary Protected Status statute has to say about adjustment of status. It would appear from a plain reading of the statutes that a TPS holder would be eligible for “adjustment of status” as being considered “being in, and maintaining, lawful status as a nonimmigrant”.

Does the grant of TPS allow for adjustment of status to someone who first entered the United States without inspection?

The Circuit courts are split on this view and on January 8, 2021 the Supreme Court granted certiorari to Sanchez v. Wolf. The issue before the Court is whether the grant of TPS authorizes, otherwise eligible applicants, the ability to obtain legal permanent residence even if they had originally entered the United States without inspection. In Sanchez , the Petitioners are husband and wife. Mr. Sanchez has an approved employment based petition and an immigrant visa is currently available. His wife, Sonia Gonzalez, is a derivative beneficiary of his application. Mr. Sanchez applied for adjustment of status at the USCIS office in New Jersey as an applicant “present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission,” “on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status,” and “subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days,” “failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status.” USCIS denied the application for adjustment of status based on agency guidance that states that non-citizens who enter the U.S. without inspection and are later granted TPS do not meet the “inspected and admitted or paroled requirements”.

There are currently several split Circuits who have taken up this issue. The Sixth, the Eighth and the Ninth Circuit have found that TPS beneficiaries have met the requirements of 8 USC §1255(a) and allow for TPS recipients to adjust status as having been “admitted and inspected”.

In Flores v. USCIS, a Honduran national entered the United States without being admitted and inspected. He was later able to obtain Temporary Protected Status. After meeting a US citizen woman they started a relationship and got married. The court noted that the text of 8 USC §1254(a) provides the same treatment for TPS holders as any other person with “lawful status as a nonimmigrant for purposes of adjustment of status under §1255”. The court reasoned that if other nonimmigrants are considered “admitted” then the same must be true for TPS holders. The court also took into consideration the purpose of TPS and how otherwise, a recipient of TPS would have to leave the United States and start all over again to regain admission. The court was conscious of the difficulties and impediments faced by those who have to apply for an immigrant visa versus those who qualify for adjustment of status.

In Ramirez v Brown , the court was presented with similar facts as the 6th Circuit. Ramirez is a Salvadoran immigrant who entered the United States without being admitted and inspected. He also obtained TPS and subsequently married a US citizen who filed for his immigrant status. The court looked at the language of the TPS statute and determined that it “explicitly refers to the adjustment statute”. It concluded that it “confers the status of lawful nonimmigrant on TPS recipients.” An individual with TPS has been admitted and inspected as required by 8 USC §1255(a) just as any other individual who “has obtained lawful status as a nonimmigrant” and therefore he “has…been ‘admitted.’” The court noted the “rigorous process” of obtaining TPS and its similarities to obtaining nonimmigrant status.

In Velasquez v. Barr , the court consolidated cases which posed the question of whether someone who entered without being admitted and inspected could adjust status after obtaining TPS. The court concluded that a TPS recipient is deemed “inspected and admitted” and therefore, may adjust status in the United States. Velasquez involves several Central American women who first entered the US without inspection. They all obtained TPS based on their respective country’s designation. They all applied for adjustment of status as immediate relatives in their respective cases. The court took into account the other Circuit court holdings including Sanchez v. Wolf . The court concluded that “a nonimmigrant is by definition ‘admitted’ to the United States.” The court then concluded that an “’admission’ of a nonimmigrant necessarily means that they were ‘inspected.’” The court turned to the definition of admitted in 8 USC §1101(a)(13)(A) to conclude that TPS recipients have been granted “lawful entry…into the United States after inspection and authorization by an immigration officer.” The court noted the Eleventh Circuit’s failure to address the meaning of nonimmigrant in 8 USC §1184 “or discuss the implication of obtaining lawful status as a nonimmigrant” in distinguishing their analysis.

The Third, the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits have rejected the finding that TPS confers a status like a nonimmigrant who has been admitted and inspected.

In Serrano v. United States Attorney General , the court reached a different conclusion than the Circuits cited above. Serrano is a Salvadoran who entered the United States without being admitted and inspected. He obtained TPS and later married a US citizen. The court determined that a TPS holder’s “’lawful status as a nonimmigrant’ for purposes of adjusting his status does not change §1255(a)’s threshold requirement that he is eligible for adjustment of status only if he was initially inspected and admitted or paroled.” The court interpreted Serrano’s argument as stating that TPS alters the inspection and admission requirement of §1255(a) as if the nonimmigrant status of §1254(a)(f)(4) is different.

The Sanchez v. Wolf case differs because the facts are not the typical family-based adjustment application. This case involves the question of whether a TPS recipient who has maintained their TPS status can adjust status relying on the statute. The District court found that §1254a(f)(4) satisfied the requirements of §1255 in regards to being inspected and admitted. The government argued that once an individual enters without inspection, she can never satisfy the threshold requirement of being admitted. The Third Circuit agreed with the government’s argument.

The Fifth Circuit had two back to back decisions regarding TPS recipients and their ability to adjust status. First, in Melendez v McAleenan the applicant was a B-2 overstay who applied to adjust status as under the 4th preference category while maintaining TPS. The court determined that there is no “fictional new entry” created by the grant of TPS and therefore, Melendez cannot adjust status. A TPS applicant for adjustment of status would have to be inspected and admitted, maintain status, and while in status be granted TPS in order to adjust status.

Second, and more recently, Nolasco is a Salvadoran who entered the US without inspection. He made a similar argument that his TPS meant he was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States. USCIS denied his adjustment of status. The court referred to Melendez’s no new entry and found that “Those with TPS who first entered the United States unlawfully are foreclosed from applying for adjustment of status as a matter of law.”

Does travel on advance parole by a TPS holder who originally entered the United States without inspection allow them to adjust status?

For decades TPS recipients who traveled on an advance parole were able to adjust status in the United States. INS clarified the issue in a 1991 General Counsel Opinion by stating that a TPS recipient who had initially entered the United States, without being inspected and admitted, could satisfy the threshold requirement by departing the United States and returning with an Advance Parole Travel Document issued pursuant to INA §244(f)(3). The memo specifically indicated that immediate relatives and special immigrants would be considered as having been inspected and admitted for adjustment of status purposes. However, employment-based cases would not be able to use the advance parole to meet the requirements of 245(k) because TPS holders will have some period of unlawful presence between their unlawful entry and the grant of TPS.

It is important to note that Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly , 25 I&N Dec. 771 (BIA 2012) stands for the point that TPS holders who travel with an advance parole are “paroled” into the United States. Meaning that once they return they satisfy the threshold requirement of being “inspected and admitted or paroled” under 245(a) and they do not trigger the unlawful presence grounds of inadmissibility. Arrabally and Yerrabelly seemed to uphold what had been the policy and practice of USCIS until 2019.

Instead, USCIS began to cite MTINA §304(c) as the basis for their denial. The interpretation offered by USCIS in issuing the Denials and Notices of Intent to Deny is that when a TPS holder departs the US with a § 244(f)(3) advance parole they return to the US in the same status they had prior to departure – but, meaning that they revert to the status they had when they first entered the United States. The USCIS Policy Manual, vol. 7, pt. B, ch. 2, § A.5 states:

It continues to state that a § 244(f)(3) advance parole is a matter of an administrative convenience – a form of maintaining a record of arrival:

“When DHS provides prior consent to a TPS beneficiary for his or her travel abroad, it documents that consent by providing an advance parole document (Form I-512) to the alien, as required by regulation. DHS issues an advance parole document for this purpose solely as a matter of administrative convenience. TPS travel authorization is unique and affords the TPS beneficiary only what is provided for under MTINA by restoring the alien to “the same immigration status the alien had at the time of departure.” The travel authorization for the TPS beneficiary allows the alien “to return to the United States in a procedurally regular fashion after foreign travel[.]” However, “[a] status quo ante return cannot create a condition needed to establish eligibility for a benefit for which the alien” would not have been eligible at the time of departure. TPS beneficiaries who depart and return to the United States with the prior consent of DHS pursuant to INA 244(f)(3) are neither admitted nor paroled upon return, but simply resume the same immigration status they had before departing. “The same immigration status” encompasses not only that status of an alien who may be present without inspection and admission or inspection and parole, but all other legal incidents of status, such as an alien’s status in deportation, exclusion, or removal proceedings.” https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-b-chapter-2#footnotelink-74

On August 20, 2020 USCIS issued a Policy Memorandum addressing the issue of TPS holders who depart on an advance parole and apply for adjustment of status. In the PM, USCIS adopts the AAO decision which continues to interpret MTINA § 304(c) as TPS holders being present in the US without inspection and admission or parole. Furthermore, upon return on advance parole they revert to the status they had when they departed – present without inspection, admission or parole. However, the Z-R-Z-C- Memo ends by stating that it is prospective in its application and allows for the adjustment of status of TPS holders who traveled on advance parole prior to the date of the issuance of the PM on August 20, 2020:

Does travel on advance parole by a TPS holder who originally entered the United States without inspection allow them to adjust status in removal proceedings?

In the removal context the BIA has addressed this issue regarding the removability of a TPS holder via Matter of Padilla Rodriguez . The Immigration Judge below determined that Mr. Padilla was not subject to removal based on INA §212(a)(6)(A)(i) (present without admission or parole). Relying on Matter of Sosa Ventura , the Board determined that a TPS recipient is “‘protected from execution of a removal order during the time [his or] her TPS’ is valid but remains removable if determined to be inadmissible under section § 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Act.” The BIA also referenced Nolasco in stating that “TPS does not create a ‘fictional legal entry’” and concluding that “respondent’s time in TPS does not change his manner of entry or his status…”

The Immigration Courts will continue to follow the Circuit Courts ruling in their jurisdictions in matters involving TPS holders who have not departed on an advance parole. However, the Immigration Courts should continue to allow for the adjustment of status of those who have been paroled pursuant to the Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly . The question becomes, if the court views the respondent as having been paroled what jurisdiction does the court have to adjudicate an adjustment? If the respondent was paroled, then they are an arriving alien and the court would not have jurisdiction over the adjustment. 8 C.F.R. § 1245.2(a)(1) Does that mean the case would have to be terminated and filed with USCIS?

President Biden is Committed to Modernizing the U.S. Immigration System

Thu, 06 May 2021 17:20:22 GMT

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

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

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

The U.S. Citizenship Act will:

PROVIDE PATHWAYS TO CITIZENSHIP & STRENGTHEN LABOR PROTECTIONS

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

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

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

● Promote immigrant and refugee integration and citizenship. The bill provides new funding to state and local governments, private organizations, educational institutions, community-based organizations, and not-for-profit

organizations to expand programs to promote integration and inclusion, increase English-language instruction, and provide assistance to individuals seeking to become citizens.

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

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

PRIORITIZE SMART BORDER CONTROLS

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

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

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

A DDRESS ROOT CAUSES OF MIGRATION

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

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

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

The History of Forced Sterilization

cris@brightsocialagency.com (Cris Haest) — Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:05:25 GMT

An American Tradition of Sterilizing Peoples Deemed “Undesirable.”

Whistleblower, Dawn Wooten, a nurse who worked at an immigration detention center in George has come forward about a high number of hysterectomies performed on immigrant women. The complaint filed on her behalf also alleges medical neglect, unsafe work practices, and a failure to protect employees and detained people from Covid-19 occurring at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility. This is not the first time in American history that women have been forced to undergo a hysterectomy. America has a lot of history of forced sterilization on poor, disabled, or incarcerated and people of color. America's detention centers are wrought with poor medical care for those detained within.

In the complaint to the Office of Inspector General, Wooten called the doctor “the uterus collector”. The accounts of ongoing brutalities at ICE concentration camps may be an immediate consequence of the racist and fascist Trump administration, but, if Wooten's claims are confirmed, they would be continuations of — not irregularities from — an American tradition of sterilizing peoples deemed “undesirable.” President Donald Trump’s administration did not create white supremacist eugenic practices to America: They have always been inherent to our country fixated on “borders” and imprisoning certain people. To say otherwise is an injustice to the countless victims of sterilization and inhumane health care provided to detainees.

“If true, the appalling conditions described in the whistleblower complaint—including allegations of mass hysterectomies being performed on vulnerable immigrant women—are a staggering abuse of human rights,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in her September 15. “This profoundly disturbing situation recalls some of the darkest moments of our nation’s history.”

Wooten did not speak much about the hysterectomy accusation during a recent press conference, instead chose to focus on concerns that the center is not testing inmates for Covid-19, that it is not being sanitized, and that little personal protective equipment is available

Federal Representative Bennie Thompson, a Democrat who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee, said the panel is conducting an investigation into conditions at the ICE-contracted facilities "and will examine these new and incredibly serious allegations."

ICE said it did not comment on issues raised with the inspector general, but takes the allegations seriously.

These violations are also part of a much larger pattern of marginalized people’s bodily autonomy being infringed. 19th-Century gynecologist J. Marion Sims created a technique for treating fistulas—holes between the vagina and bladder or rectum—by experimenting on enslaved women. The Tuskegee syphilis study in the 20th Century, during which researchers conducted the study without the benefit of patients’ informed consent. Researchers told the men they were being treated for “bad blood,” a local term used to describe several ailments, including syphilis, anemia, and fatigue. In exchange for taking part in the study, the men received free medical exams, free meals, and burial insurance. Originally projected to last 6 months, the study went on for 40 years.

There are more chapters to this grotesque treatment of the detained. The man dubbed the “father of modern gynecology,” J. Marion Sims , conducted experiments on enslaved Black women without anesthesia who has statues around the US.

Under international law, anyone detained has a right to be treated with humanity and respect for their innate dignity, and that right includes access to appropriate medical care. The United States is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Under the ICCPR, governments should provide “adequate medical care during detention.” In prison, where most material conditions of incarceration are directly attributable to the state, and inmates have been deprived of their liberty and means of self-protection, the requirement to protect individuals from the risk of torture or ill-treatment can give rise to a positive duty of care, which has been interpreted to include effective methods of screening, prevention, and treatment of life-threatening diseases. Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states, “Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law.”

The US government’s negligence to provide sufficient medical care to people in immigration detention cannot be detached from its more comprehensive failure to maintain a limited detention system in keeping with human rights principles. The United States may have a legitimate interest in detaining some undocumented immigrants to ensure their presence at trial and to ensure the deportation of those judged to be removable, many people in detention, including thousands of asylum-seekers, are held under statutory provisions that mandate detention without adequate individualized review.

In 1907, Indiana passed the first eugenic sterilization law, which “made sterilization mandatory for criminals, idiots, rapists, and imbeciles in state custody”. California’s 1909 eugenics law stated that anyone committed to a state institution could be sterilized. 32 states enacted laws that led to between 60 and 70,000 people being made infertile.

The Racial Integrity Act of 1924 encouraged the sterilization of institutionalized people in Virginia to improve the "health of the patient and the welfare of society." In the 1927 case Buck v. Bell, the Supreme Court upheld that act and the judgment resulted in 70,000 sterilizations of people considered "unfit" to reproduce, mainly due to mental illness, but also based on physical disability, poverty, or race. The Virginia Sterilization Act of 1924 gave a model to Adolf Hitler for Nazi Germany’s sterilization program . In 1967, both the Racial Integrity Act and the Virginia Sterilization Act of 1924 were officially overturned by the United States Supreme Court in their ruling Loving v. Virginia. In 2001, the Virginia General Assembly passed a resolution that condemned the Racial Integrity Act for its "use as a respectable, 'scientific' veneer to cover the activities of those who held blatantly racist views."

As the eugenics crusade earned followers, laws started popping up aimed at preventing people who were considered hereditarily “unfit” from producing children, including sterilization.

Thousands of Mexican women who had come to the U.S. had been forcibly sterilized between the 1920s and 1950s for being deemed “immigrants of an undesirable type.” In the 1960s and 1970s, Mexican women in Los Angeles were tricked into having non-consensual sterilizations to obtain medical care or have their babies delivered. Between the 1930s and the 1970s, nearly one-third of women in Puerto Rico were sterilized as part of a mass eugenics campaign, something that continues to impact Puerto Rican women and the larger Puerto Rican community today. In Los Angeles, Mexican immigrant women filed a 1975 civil rights lawsuit claiming that doctors were compelling Spanish-speaking mothers during labor into agreeing to tubal ligation; the case led to the California State Legislature repealing the 1909 sterilization law.

Civil rights activist Fannie Lou Hamer has spoken about a forced hysterectomy without her knowledge in 1961 while undergoing surgery to remove a uterine tumor. Teaching hospitals performed this procedure on poor Black women frequently enough that it became known as a “Mississippi appendectomy.”

In the 1970s, the U.S. administration forcibly sterilized as many as 70,000 Native women through the Indian Health Service. An estimated 25 percent of Native women of childbearing age were sterilized by 1976. This attack on reproductive freedoms of Native women was concurrent with feminists rejoicing the expansion of women’s right to choose, due to the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade. Also in 1973, two Black sisters, Minnie and Marie Relf were sterilized under the premise of receiving birth control shots, their lawsuit drew national attention to how the U.S. government was targeting poor Black women with sterilization efforts. As desegregation efforts expanded sterilization rates for Black women increased, evidence of a backlash to integration intended to reassert “white supremacist control and racial hierarchies specifically through the control of Black reproduction and future Black lives,” according to Dr. Alexandra Minna Stern, Professor of American Culture, History, and Women's Studies at the University of Michigan, and leader of the Sterilization and Social Justice Lab, which is studying the history of sterilization in the United States.

These practices didn't stay in the twentieth century though. Almost 40 women inmates endured forced sterilizations without giving proper consent in California between 2005 and 2011. In 2013, an investigation found that at least 148 female inmates in two California prisons were coercively sterilized between 2006 to 2010. In 2017, a judge in Tennessee offered reduced jail time to men and women who agreed to intrauterine devices (IUDs) or vasectomies. Within the prior two decades, judges have even ordered women not to become pregnant during their probation or until regaining custody of their children.

Based on the most recent analysis of independent medical experts, the 72-page report, “Code Red: The Fatal Consequences of Dangerously Substandard Medical Care in Immigration Detention,” examines the 15 “Detainee Death Reviews” ICE released from December 2015 through April 2017. The physicians conducting the analysis also found evidence of substandard medical practices in all but one of the remaining reviews.

“ICE has proven unable or unwilling to provide adequately for the health and safety of the people it detains,” said Clara Long, a senior US researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The Trump administration’s efforts to drastically expand the already-bloated immigration detention system will only put more people at risk.”

“To the extent that Congress continues to fund this system, they are complicit in its abuses,” said Heidi Altman, policy director at the National Immigrant Justice Center, a nongovernmental group dedicated to ensuring human rights protections and access to justice for all immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. “Congress should immediately act to decrease rather than expand detention and demand robust health, safety, and human rights standards in immigration detention.”

The new report is an update of a 2017 Human Rights Watch report that examined deaths in detention between 2012 and 2015, as well as a 2016 report by the American Civil Liberties Union, the Detention Watch Network, and the National Immigrant Justice Center that examined deaths in detention between 2010 and 2012.

Watch "No Más Bebés" to learn more about this tragic history in America: https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/films/no-mas-bebes/

Trump's Executive Order On Temporarily Suspending Some Immigration

Fri, 01 May 2020 20:45:15 GMT

COVID-19 Immigration Updates - Largely Rhetoric

A new Presidential proclamation became effective as of Thursday 4/23 at 11:59 PM (ET) and will remain in effect for 50 days, continued as necessary per DHS and Labor’s recommendations. Those affected are anyone seeking to enter the country as an immigrant resident and Is currently residing outside of the United States, does not already have a green card, or does not already have or will obtain an official travel document (such as a transportation letter, boarding foil, or advance parole document).

The following will not be affected by this executive action:

Any who have already applied or will apply for adjustment of status in the U.S.
Lawful permanent residents or LPRs
Nonimmigrant visa holders and applicants
Healthcare professionals coming to perform work essential to combatting, recovering from, or otherwise alleviating the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak (as determined by Dept. of State and DHS).
EB-5 immigrant investors
Spouses of U.S. citizens
Children of U.S. citizens under the age of 21 and prospective adoptees
Individuals who would further important U.S. law enforcement objectives (as determined by DHS and DOS)
Members of the U.S. Armed Forces and their spouses and children
Individuals and their spouses or children eligible for Special Immigrant Visas (SI or SQ classification)
Individuals whose entry would be in the national interest (as determined by DOS and DHS)
Asylum seekers

Of course all this is up to the discretion of the consular officer to determine if said exemptions apply, and removals will be prioritized for anyone attempting to evade this order by fraud, willful misrepresentation, or illegal entry.

Changes to DHS, USCIS, CPB & ICE

All USCIS offices are all closed until June 4, 2020 and all in-person interviews, biometrics appointment notices, and InfoPass appointments have been suspended. Appointments are being automatically rescheduled for dates in the future once USCIS resumes normal operations. USCIS will continue to process all requests that can be made by mail, is still processing cases, as well as issuing receipt notices, work permits, travel permits, green cards, I-797 Approval Notices, and other official notices. Scanned signatures will now be allowed on documents eliminating the need for hard copies, electronic signatures will not be accepted, however, forms with photo ID requirements have not been eliminated at this time. Old biometrics will be reused for work permit renewals, it is unclear if new applicants actions will be process without biometrical data.

Despite all these changes no automatic maintenance of status nor automatic extension of benefits has not been implemented at this time. While this could alleviate much of the strain and anxiety in the immigration system, USCIS has not instituted a nationwide policy automatically extending status for those currently in status or extending immigration benefit deadlines.

With the rise in unemployment due to the COVID-19 pandemic, USCIS has stated that unemployment benefits are not considered by USCIS in a public-charge inadmissibility determination because unemployment insurance is considered by USCIS as an “earned” benefit. (Whether a foreign national on a work visa can apply for and receive unemployment benefits is another matter and may vary from state to state. Most states are beginning to provide specific guidance on applying for these benefits during the COVID-19 crisis on their unemployment websites.) Nor will any testing or treatment of COVID-19 be considered a public-charge determination, even if such treatment is provided or paid for by one or more public benefits. However, the State Department has not directly addressed how determinations will be made on these issues by consulates overseas.

ICE will continue to remain open during the pandemic but will refocus its enforcement priorities on public safety risks and individuals subject to mandatory detention based on criminal grounds. Furthermore ICE has announced it will not carry out enforcement operations in or near health care facilities.

Bond posting will be able to continue at ICE ERO facilities already equipped with plexiglass barriers, or “bond windows.” Stays of removal may also be filed by mail but any fees or fines must be paid by money order or other certified fund.

ICE has also momentarily suspended all social visits for detainees. No family and friends may visit detained individuals in ICE facilities, however, legal counsel is exempted from this order. All social visits must now be made via telephone.

The most vulnerable ICE detainees have also been earmarked for release but as of 4/7/20 only 160 individuals had been released, much too a small number considering there are over 35,000 individuals, 60% of whole do not have a criminal record , currently imprisoned by ICE. .Those prioritized are pregnant women and people over the age of 60. The fight against this unnecessary imprisonment during the COVID-19 pandemic is being taken directly to ICE. Lawsuits have been filed by the ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Center, Northwest Immigrants Project and others. The agency has so far administered 1,030 tests to detainees, and 490 — 48% — have come back positive .

Continued detention of individuals detained by ICE also possesses logistical challenges and health risks to their immigration attorneys. While immigration courts have postponed non-detained hearings through May 15 , detained hearings continue to be heard, exposing attorneys to risks of exposure to COVID-19 at immigration courts and detention centers. And, as of March 25, attorneys representing detained immigrants are required to provided their own personal protective equipment (PPE) when visiting clients or making an in-person appearance in court.

Meanwhile, on a related note, the U.S. Circuit of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed an injunction in California requiring bond hearings for immigration detainees with removal orders who have been detained for six months or more.

Maintenance of status of LPRs who have been caught outside the US remains a big issue, as USCIS has not advised on what LPRs can do to maintain their permanent-resident status if they are now stuck abroad for 12 months or more. Under the law, LPRs who are abroad for 12 months or more are presumed to have abandoned the intent to reside permanently in the United States and can inadvertently lose their green cards. Foreign nationals are encouraged to document their intent to return to the United States in order to maintain status if they have been unable to return back to the US because of the pandemic.

At this time all consulates and embassies abroad are closed and all routine visa services for immigrants and non-immigrants have been suspended. Department of State, (DOS) has publish no plans on a reopening schedule . USCIS Offices Preparing to Reopen on June 4

Continuous Immigration Fight During Covid-19

Mon, 13 Apr 2020 18:16:21 GMT

PRACTICING IMMIGRATION LAW IN THE COVID-19 ERA

With confirmed cases of Covid-19 in immigration centers and haunting headlines across many news outlets, it's hard to comprehend the reality we are seeing in our justice system. It may be even harder to hold on to hope.

At SRA Law , we have always focused on helping the helpless. Now we must also focus on helping those that are losing their hope in a system and a government hell-bent on harm towards immigrants. After celebrating our law firm's 25th anniversary this year, we had to quickly begin moving towards a shelter in place work and school environments. While not easy, we've also had to continue to show up to courtrooms for hearings , depositions, and to meet filing deadlines on behalf of our clients. Staying home is simply not an option for us as without continuing this work, we wouldn't be able to pay our staff let alone keep up the fight for all of our clients, whether they are part of our pro-bono cases or not. Everyone deserves a chance at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. While our law firm has the chance to apply for things like the Small Business Administration loan (SBA) , many of our clients will be left out of any sort of stimulus even though here in Texas they most definitely pay their taxes , and if given legal status would add an additional $2.8 Billion a year nationwide. Many questions on what the new normal will look like moving forward remain.

Due Process is Being Hurt by COVID-19

Mon, 30 Mar 2020 20:18:37 GMT

Could the immigration courts get more chaotic?
Coronavirus adds to stress

Fights, riot at detention centers intensify calls to free detained immigrants

As counties and states go into shelter in place, Immigration courts across the nation are still open, counter to what the CDC has advised for public safety. Federal criminal courts closed two weeks ago. The cruelty of the Trump Immigration policies continue to be on full display. We at Saenz-Rodriguez & Associates have done everything we can to make sure our staff and clients are safe and healthy. We are offering Zoom consultations as our most of staff are working from home.

Even with these precautions for our staff and clients, d eadlines must be met and documents have to be organized, copied and prepared for filing - I wish I could do it all from home. The government does not care about the risk to detainees, advocates or even their own employees who are still working everyday. It’s so sad.

I’m actually in my office ( we are essential business for as long as courts remain open) - no staff just me....but I still have to open doors, get in elevators, use a phone, handle documents etc. That means the more protection the better. Just trying to be socially responsible while I am not at home.

Bond hearings are taking place via telephone and in-person as it depends on the Judge presiding over the case. We would love to leave all of the personal protective equipment for those in the medical field, however most immigration cases are business as usual and with confirmed cases of COVID19 within the immigration court system, we as lawyers and clients must protect ourselves while being forced to either show up in a courthouse with more than ten people present or hope for telephone hearings, which may not be in the best interest of the clients case. Due process is being denied to our clients by the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

We will continue to fight for our clients' rights and safety. The government should, at the very least, release detained migrants with no criminal records and those with health conditions that make them more vulnerable to the coronavirus. Forcing people to remain in detention centers only converts them to true concentration camps during this public health crisis.

As one reply on Twitter puts it, " Thousands of appeals headed their way while the noncitizens remain detained until those appeals are decided. A huge avoidable mess ."

Univision Interview - What Should Immigrants Do During The Coronavirus Pandemic?

Mon, 30 Mar 2020 20:08:37 GMT

The public health crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic is affecting immigrants in many ways. Should you visit a hospital if you have symptoms, apply for financial aide after losing a job? How are cases being handled now that some judges are moving hearings to telephone or video conferencing? We're losing the human touch with these hearings and losing out on the emotions that are necessary from witnesses during these types of hearings.

On the Recent Changes to Public Charge Policy

Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:13:38 GMT

Recent Changes in US Public Charge Policy

The recent rule changes concerning “ public charge ” rules in US immigration have gone into effect as of February 24th, 2020. Now that these changes have taken hold it is crucial to understand who can be affected and which government assistance programs are now being considered as part of being a public charge. Those who will be affected by the rule changes are people pursuing lawful permanent resident status otherwise known as a “green card” and anyone attempting to immigrate to the United States. All immigrant and non-immigrant petitions submitted to US Citizenship and Immigration Services ( USCIS ) after 2/24/2020 are subject to the new rule changes.

Are you at risk under the public charge rule?

Take the Boundless simulation quiz to find out.

USCIS defines a public charge as someone who is more likely than not to receive public benefits for 12 months in a period of 36 months. It is important to understand which programs are being now considered under the public charge characterization as those deemed a public charge are immediately denied immigration status, access to a green card, and more. These following programs will be used to exclude immigration under public charge (changes to policy are listed in bold):

•Supplemental Security Income ( SSI )

•Temporary Assistance to Needy Families ( TANF )

•State General Cash Assistance Programs

•Medicaid Covering Institutionalized Long Term Care

•Non-Emergency Medicaid

•Supplemental Nutrition & Assistance Program ( SNAP )

•Section 8 Housing Voucher Program & Project Based Rental Assistance

•Public Housing

However, not all government assistance programs are affected by the rule change. The current programs not affected and can still be used by those seeking legal immigration status are:

•Emergency Medicaid (including vaccines)

•Children’s Health Insurance Program ( CHIP )

•National School Lunch Program ( NSLP )

•Head Start and Public Schools

•Foster Care and Adoption

•Earned Income Tax Credit ( EITC )

•Disaster Relief

•Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children ( WIC )

•Benefits mentioned above if they are received by US Citizen Children

In the application process USCIS will assign weight—negative and positive, as well as heavily negative and heavily positive—to five determining factors to determine whether the applicant passes the public charge test.

1. Age: Applicants younger than 18 or older than 61 will have to demonstrate why their age will not affect their ability to work. Full-time students who do not work will be viewed as heavily negative.

2. Health: Applicants with long term medical needs must show whether their condition affects their ability to work or care for themselves. Having private health insurance (not ACA) is viewed as highly positive.

3. Family status: Household size will include dependents and persons providing the applicant with more than 50% of financial support.

4. Assets, Resources, & Financial Status: The annual income of the applicant must be at least 125% of the federal poverty guideline (FPG) or household income of the sponsor must be over 250%. Applicants gainfully employed and authorized to work are viewed as heavily positive.

5. Education & Skills: DHS will consider the education level of each applicant, occupational skills, English proficiency, and status as a caregiver.

Not all government assistance programs will affect an applicant, and applicants specifically do not need to worry if they take advantage of WIC, NSLP, EIC, or CHIP programs. These programs are exempt from the public charge definition and should be utilized when needed.

Press Clippings from NBC, KERA, D Magazine, & More

Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:40:37 GMT

Saenz-Rodriguez & Associates in the News and Across the Internet

Trump Politicizing 20-Year-Old Mollie Tibbett's Death? | George Rodriguez Discusses LIVE

Thu, 23 Aug 2018 05:00:00 GMT

SRA Law's Immigration Attorney George Rodriguez LIVE on the radio in San Francisco, California.

Don't miss any of our experienced immigration staff's radio appearances and interviews. Subscribe to our Soundcloud or play our entire playlist below.

sra_law

BREAKING NEWS: Trump Takes Action Immigration, Ends CPB One: George Rodriguez Interview with NBC 5

This is a subtitle for your new post

Impact on Immigrants and Legal Processes

What This Means Going Forward

Our Commitment to You

BREAKING IMMIGRATION NEWS: U.S. extends protected migrant status to mid-2024 for 6 nationalities

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) will be extended to June 30, 2024, for citizens of Haiti, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Sudan, Honduras, and Nepal

"We welcome this great news, but we really need to work for a permanent solution for TPS, DACA and farmworkers." - George Rodriguez

BREAKING NEWS: DHS Publishes Final Rule to Restore Asylum Regulations Consistent with Asylumworks Vacatur

WHAT THIS MEANS:

﻿ We no longer have to wait for an asylum application to be pending 365 days before applying for work authorization.

The rules were changed back to 180 days instead.

SUMMARY:

DATES:

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

FROM U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:

George Rodriguez Receives the 2022 State Bar of Texas' Mentorship Award for the Immigration & Nationality Section!

Congratulations to our own George Rodriguez on receiving the State Bar of Texas' Mentorship Award for the Immigration & Nationality Section!

Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez – Saenz-Rodriguez & Associates – Immigration Lawyers Serving Dallas & Fort Worth for More Than 20 Years

"Success means striking the perfect balance between being a business owner, parent, spouse and humanitarian."

- Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez ﻿

The majority of executives use stories to persuade and communicate in the workplace. Can you share with our readers examples of how you implement that in your business to communicate effectively with your team?

The Department of Homeland Security Announced the Designation of Ukraine for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for 18 months.

Secretary Mayorkas Designates Ukraine for Temporary Protected Status for 18 Months

What is Political Asylum in the USA?

What is Political Asylum in the USA?

What is political asylum?

Are you a political refugee?

How do I get political asylum in the USA?

What is the process for Political Asylum in the USA?

What Documents do I need for a Political Asylum application?

How Long Does the Asylum Process Take?

USCIS Breaking News: COVID-19 Vaccination Required for Immigration Medical Examinations Ex

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:

COVID-19 Vaccination Required for Immigration Medical Examinations

Pathway to Citizenship in Build Back Better Reconciliation: House Judiciary Committee Legislative Text Fact Sheet

HAPPENING TODAY

WATCH NOW:

Summary: What is Happening with the DHS Enforcement Priorities?

From the Immigrant Legal Resource Center

What is Happening with the DHS Enforcement Priorities?

What is Prosecutorial Discretion and What does it Mean Moving Forward?

Unprecedented & Dangerous Ruling by Federal Judge

Immigration Lawyers Say Trump-Appointed Judge in Texas Just Decided He’s in Control of ICE and ‘Emperor of U.S. Immigration Policy’ in ‘Unprecedented and Outrageous’ Ruling

- Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez,

Immigration Lawyer

Practice Alert from American Immigration Lawyers Association: Contact Information for Afghan Evacuation Operations

Do you need immigration assistance? Call or contact our offices to schedule a consultation with our immigration law firm.

BREAKING IMMIGRATION NEWS: Federal Judge in Texas Decision to Suspend DACA

Judge orders U.S. to close Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program to new applicants prohibited from approving first-time DACA requests

DALLAS TEXAS IMMLAW MEMBERSHIP Feature

Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez Accepts IMMLAW Invitation

IMMLAW Membership Feature Excerpt

What is IMMLAW?

Can Temporary Protected Status (TPS) Lead to Adjustment of Status (aka “Green Card”)?

Can TPS status lead to adjustment of status (a “green card”)?

Attorney General vacated two of the most destructive cases in the history of asylum protections

Executive Office for Immigration Review Volume 28

BREAKING NEWS: ICE Interim Litigation Position Regarding Motions to Reopen in Light of the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Niz-Chavez v. Garland

BREAKING NEWS from United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Interim Policy Marks Significant Step Towards a More Just Immigration System.

Interim Guidance to OPLA Attorneys Regarding Civil Immigration Enforcement and Removal Policies and Priorities

What does this mean if you're seeking asylum or permanent status in the United States?

Is it Possible to Adjust Status Based on TPS?

President Biden is Committed to Modernizing the U.S. Immigration System

The History of Forced Sterilization

An American Tradition of Sterilizing Peoples Deemed “Undesirable.”

Watch "No Más Bebés" to learn more about this tragic history in America: https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/films/no-mas-bebes/

Trump's Executive Order On Temporarily Suspending Some Immigration

COVID-19 Immigration Updates - Largely Rhetoric

The following will not be affected by this executive action:

Changes to DHS, USCIS, CPB & ICE

Continuous Immigration Fight During Covid-19

PRACTICING IMMIGRATION LAW IN THE COVID-19 ERA

Due Process is Being Hurt by COVID-19

Could the immigration courts get more chaotic? Coronavirus adds to stress

Univision Interview - What Should Immigrants Do During The Coronavirus Pandemic?

On the Recent Changes to Public Charge Policy

Recent Changes in US Public Charge Policy

We no longer have to wait for an asylum application to be pending 365 days before applying for work authorization.

- Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez

Could the immigration courts get more chaotic?
Coronavirus adds to stress