Greetings! Beach-Oswald Immigration Law Associates is committed to providing you with this newsletter to keep you up to date with information regarding immigration law and other issues that affect you! Read on for our January 2012 e-newsletter edition!
|
|
|
Recent Successes
Ms. G received a recommended approval from the Arlington Asylum Office. Ms. G is a citizen of the Ivory Coast who fled her native country after being threatened on account of her affiliation and activism with the FPI. Despite recent changes in the governance of the Ivory Coast, BOILA assisted Ms. G in establishing that her past persecution entitled her to a grant of asylum.
Mr. E was also granted asylum by the Arlington Asylum Office. Mr. E, a native of Cameroon, fled his native country after suffering a series of arrests on account of his political opinion and association with the UFDC. Despite the fact that his series medical problems interfered with his ability to recount his past persecution, BOILA successfully persuaded the asylum officer that but for his medical condition's impact on his memory, he would have provided detailed and credible testimony.
Ms. A, a native citizen of Togo and member of the CDPA, had her case remanded by the Board of Immigration Appeals. After the immigration judge denied her application for asylum, she retained BOILA to assist her on her appeal. The BIA agreed with BOILA's legal arguments that the immigration judge made a series of legal errors in her adverse credibility finding. Ms. A will now have another chance to pursue her application for political asylum.
Mr. L, a citizen of China, was granted asylum by the Newark, New Jersey Immigration Court. Mr. L feared persecution because he is a committed Falun Gong practitioner. Although Mr. L was able to flee his native country without facing persecution, BOILA helped him establish that he possessed a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of his political opinion. At the conclusion of his case, the Newark immigration court commended BOILA for its presentation of Mr. L's case.
Ms. M finally got her I-130 Alien Relative petition approved by USCIS, after many years of delays caused by USCIS in the processing of her petition. BOILA had previously gotten her removal proceedings terminated and so Mrs. M and her husband will now be able to file for her permanent residency.
Mrs. L, a citizen of Sweden, had her I-485 petition approved by USCIS, granting her conditional permanent residency, in record time of three months, so that she and her spouse could travel to Sweden together.
|
Timing is Everything - Getting your Driver's License or Social Security Number
One of the first things a new F, M or J nonimmigrant typically wants to do after entering the United States is get a driver's license or, where appropriate, a SSN. Like many things, however, correct timing is everything. The Student and Exchange Visitor Program wants all F, M or J nonimmigrants eligible for a driver's license or an SSN to have the easiest experience possible. Following these six simple tips makes the process go much smoother and saves a lot of time in the end: 1. Wait 10 days after you arrive in the United States. You may want to apply for a driver's license or SSN right away, but be patient. The 10-day wait allows time for all the government databases to update with your arrival information. 2. Know what you are applying for and if you are eligible. While you are waiting, talk with your school's designated school official (DSO) or sponsor's responsible officer (RO) or alternate responsible officer (ARO) to learn more about your state's driving rules and regulations. If you want an SSN, have your DSO or RO/ARO confirm that you are eligible before you apply. 3. Make sure your record in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) is up-to-date and in Active status. SEVIS is the database that contains information for all F, M and J nonimmigrants in the United States. A DSO manages an F or M nonimmigrant's SEVIS record. An RO/ARO manages an exchange visitor's SEVIS record. The DSO or RO/ARO (whichever applies to you) must place your record in Active status when you report to the school or program. Talk with your DSO or RO/ARO before you apply for a license or SSN to make sure your record is Active in SEVIS. If your record is not Active when you apply, your application will be rejected. 4. Check your forms. Check all your forms to make sure your information is correct. This is data integrity. Data integrity is very important because if you have different information on different forms, it will cause delays. Specifically, check your Form I-94, "Arrival/Departure Record," for handwritten information. If the information on your Form I-94 is different than on your passport or Form I-20, "Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status," or Form DS-2019, "Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor (J-1) Status," please see the DMV Fact Sheet for more information. 5. Wait two days after your DSO or RO/ARO activates your record in SEVIS. After your DSO or RO/ARO activates your record in SEVIS, you should wait at least two federal business days before you apply for a driver's license or SSN. This gives all the databases time to update with your new information. 6. Bring all your paperwork. When you go to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) - the common name for a state government office that issues driver's licenses - or to the Social Security office, remember to bring all your paperwork. For most states, the paperwork includes these documents: - Form I-20 or Form DS-2019
- Form I-94, "Arrival/Departure Record"
- Passport (with visa, if applicable)
- Proof of legal presence or residence (ask your DSO or RO/ARO what your state
- requires)
For an SSN, you must also bring a letter of employment and an endorsed Form I-20 (for F students). Exchange visitors should consult with their RO/ARO first to make sure the Social Security Administration requires a letter of employment for the J category. These six tips should help you get your driver's license or SSN without having any major problems. If you are interested in specific details about F-2, M-2 or J-2 dependents, please see page 8 of the DMV Fact Sheet. Always talk with your DSO or RO/ARO before you try to apply.
Your DSO or RO/ARO may have more information about your particular state. Safe travels!
Learn More Obtaining a Social Security Number (SSN) DMV Fact Sheet |
|
Where does the Republican Front Runner Stand on Immigration?
With victories in both Iowa and New Hampshire, many political pundits are predicting that Mitt Romney will receive the Republican nomination for the Presidency. Although Immigration is likely to be a hot topic and has been highlighted by many of Romney's GOP rivals including Texas Governor Perry, Romney has largely stayed silent on the issue. This is changing with the upcoming South Carolina primary. Mitt Romney is now making immigration a central issue as his campaign moves to South Carolina. Because South Carolina is being sued by the federal government for its crackdown on illegal immigrants, immigration remains a hot button issue in the state. Therefore, Mitt Romney has no choice but to highlight the issue. Kris Kobach, the author of Arizona's controversial immigration bill, has recently endorsed Romney and stated that Romney "would be the candidate who will finally secure the borders and put a stop to the magnets, like in-state tuition, that encourage illegal aliens to remain in our country unlawfully." Given Governor Perry's history of allowing illegal immigrants in Texas to receive in-state tuition, this is a clear swipe at his Romney's rival. Romney has repeatedly stated that he would veto the DREAM Act and also require any illegal immigrant who eventually obtain a green card to be forced to return to their home countries to receive their green cards at the respective US Embassy. This shows no knowledge of the 10 and 3 year bar problems, along with the fact that families could be separated for years. Romney however has tried to pander to Hispanic voters by touting his ties to Latin America. At a rally last week, Romney mentioned how his great-grandfather brought the family to Mexico in 1885. Romney also mentioned how his father was born in Mexico and immigrated to the United States when he was five years old. Romney's proposals may lead to some problems in Florida. As the GOP continues to try to court the Latino vote, his anti-immigrant stance is likely to lose him votes in heavily immigrant areas such as Miami-Dade county. Hispanic voters in the GOP primary may be attracted to Gingrich's plan. Gingrich seeks to create a proposal where by local panels would decide if illegal immigrants who have been in the country for over 25 years should be allowed to stay. Gingrich has also indicated a friendly immigration approach for business employees and entrepreneurs to prevent the brain drain of bright immigrants in our schools. Like Bush, he would like to set up a guest worker program and increase the number of certain employment visas. Meanwhile, the Obama administration has been instituting a new program to train ICE officers how to determine which immigrants are deemed serious enough to be put in removal proceedings. However, ICE has responded by merely stepping up the deportation of overstays and non-criminal final orders cases. Some believe that Obama is now trying to court the Latino vote by only targeting high profile illegal immigrants. However, it's hard to forget that the administration did deport over 400,000 illegal immigrants in 2011 which is by far the highest statistic of any president. Although questions remain as to where candidates stand on the issue of immigration, at the very least this issue is gaining momentum in the 2012 election. There may be some flip-flopping, but flip-flopping discussion on immigration is better than no discussion at all. |
Prosecutorial Discretion - What Happens Next?
Is ICE trying to implement prosecutorial discretion which I thought had always been exercised and a prerogative or is this a "show and tell" display to meet a mandate? Specifically, ICE's efforts have been focused on a pilot program in two cities for illegal immigrants whose cases fall under the jurisdiction of the Baltimore Immigration Court and the Denver Immigration Court. Of the 12,000 cases reviewed thus far for those courts, ICE has recommended that 12% of them be administratively closed by the Immigration Courts. The New York Times reported that as prosecutorial discretion is implemented nationwide, an estimated 39,000 cases could be administratively closed. With the long wait times in several Immigration Courts, administratively closing these cases will certainly ease the backlog. Or will it? Since cases closed may be those already ready to go with positive results and now they may just be put on a back burner until 2014. Although this is a step in the right direction, many questions remain regarding prosecutorial discretion. Specifically, what does "administratively closed" mean? These individuals who benefit from prosecutorial discretion may remain in a status of limbo. Their unlawful presence in the United States will simply continue and their ability to work in this country will be severely impacted. ICE has already determined that these individuals are of no security threat by instituting background checks. It's time for policy makers to determine what happens next for those that benefit from prosecutorial discretion. For the additional 3 or 4 years of waiting shouldn't they receive the ability to support themselves while here awaiting another turn on the roundabout of delays. Additionally, questions still remain for immigration lawyers and how they can use prosecutorial discretion. Currently, ICE prosecutors are individually reviewing the files of illegal immigrants. ICE prosecutors can then file a motion for prosecutorial discretion which the illegal alien can then agree to or reject. However, illegal aliens should be able to request prosecutorial discretion as well. With the 300,000 cases ICE has to review, it's likely that there are thousands that qualify for prosecutorial discretion under the Morton Memo that may not have it appropriately applied. Given the large element of discretion, illegal immigrants should be able to formally request prosecutorial discretion. Prosecutorial Discretion is a long over due decision by the Department of Homeland Security. However, for this to have a lasting impact, the ambiguities within it must be resolved. Making a case "administratively closed" doesn't resolve the true problems that these individuals are facing. |
|
|
|
|
|
Department of State Priority Dates
|  | As of February 1, 2012
For nationals of all countries but India, China, and the Philippines:
F1, Unmarried Sons and Daughters of US Citizens who are over 21 - December 22, 2004
F2A, Spouses/Children of Lawful Permanent Residents - June 8, 2009
F2B, Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents who are over 21 - October 15, 2003
F3, Married Sons and Daughters of US Citizens - December 1, 2001
F4, Brothers and Sisters of Adult US Citizens - September 8, 2000
|
|
Canada Seeks Skilled Immigrants to Strengthen Its Economy 
As an estimated large fraction of the Canadian workforce retires this coming year, Canada is expected to suffer a shortage of workers. Statistics show that there will not be enough new workers to fill in for all the people retiring. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has declared that there is a way to avoid this situation - by having immigrants take over a portion of the retirees' jobs. For this purpose, the Prime Minister is advocating to reform Canadian immigration laws and to recruit skilled immigrants into the workforce. Some reforms have already been set in motion in the recent past, but they are not enough. These reforms include, but are not limited to: 1. Restricting the quantity of applications that can be processed. For instance, the number of applications for the Federal Immigrant Investor Program was limited to only seven hundred applicants per year. This quota is normally filled within a week, and thus leaves many applicants having to wait to apply again the following year. 2. Changing the submission requirements and guidelines for a large number of immigration petitions. These reforms also allow the Department of Citizenship and Immigration in Canada to select applications of immigrants who are applying for certain specific occupations. Further restrictions are most likely to be placed on immigration petitions in order for Canada to acquire a skilled labor force for the specific positions that are expected to become open this year. Yet, despite the increased restrictions, there are increasing opportunities for investors to invest in Canada's economy and to immigrate there. This is because Canada emerged less scathed from the recession than many other first world countries and because it is currently experiencing steady economic growth. According to a statement made by Prime Minister Harper, "Canada's entrepreneurs are the backbone of our economy, creating jobs and driving economic growth in communities large and small across our country. [...] We have listened and have taken decisive action to address their needs and concerns...." With these entrepreneurs working hard and employing immigrants, Canada's economy will grow increasingly stronger in the years to come. |
|
A Battle in the Times over the Immigration Court
|  | |
A battle is brewing in the New York Times over the performance of the Executive Office of Immigration Review. On January 2, 2012, an Editorial in the New York Times issued a rather scathing review of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
The opinion piece in the New York Times was based on Judulang v. Holder. In the 9-0 decision written by Justice Kagen, the Supreme Court stated that the BIA's approach is "arbitrary and capricious" and that an "when an administrative agency sets policy, it must provide a reasoned explanation for its action. This is not a high bar, but it is an unwavering one. Here, the BIA failed to meet it."
In Judulang, the Court addresses whether a lawful permanent resident who had been in the United States for nearly 30 years could be removed based on a 1989 voluntary manslaughter conviction. Under the older version of INA 212(c) which was in place when Judulang was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, there is a "waiver of excludability" which would allow a noncitizen to enter the country despite a criminal conviction. The Supreme Court reversed the BIA and 9th Circuit's upholding arguing that the BIA used false reasoning in trying to find a comparable ground for a "crime of violence" with the crime that Judulang actually committed. The New York Times opinion on the case was harsh and stated, "The board's decision-making process reflects the dysfunction of the overburdened immigration system, which is in need of a complete overhaul."
Juan Osuna, Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, responded in a letter to the New York Times on January 9. Osuna asserted that the BIA does more than rubber stamp IJ opinions, as the New York Times article claimed. Additionally, Osuna also noted that the Board has largely eliminated the use of "affirmance without opinion."
This fight in the New York Times however doesn't mention one of the critical issues - the need for some reform in the immigration court system. The dockets of immigration judges are lengthy and often dilatory. Syracuse University noted last year that the current wait time for theImmigration Court system is over 300 days. In certain cities, such asNew York andLos Angeles, the wait time was over 650 days. There clearly is a need to hire more immigration judges to reduce the dockets or eliminate the issuance of Notice to Appear charging documents that may often not be necessary. Additionally, IJs should be staffed with clerks that are well trained in country conditions for those that are seeking relief as an IJ is only able to make a proper decision if they truly know the situation in the country of nationality.
Although the BIA may be innundated with appeals, their structure is also in need of some change. 15 members may not be enough, three member reviewing panels may not be enough, and the lack of oral arguments that the BIA grants each year is minimalistic. A written brief can only provide limited information and with Board members unable to ask even clarifying questions, how can justice be properly served?
|
|
|
