Category Archives: deportation

IMMIGRATION COURTS AND USCIS CASES BACKLOG

Posted on by

The backlog in the Immigration Courts and in the United States Citizenship Services (USCIS) is a growing concern for many immigrants and their families. The backlog has created long wait times for individuals seeking resolution to their immigration cases, leading to uncertainty and anxiety about their status in the United States.

The Immigration Courts, which fall under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice, are responsible for adjudicating immigration cases, including removal proceedings (deportation), and asylum claims. In recent years, the backlog of cases in these courts has reached unprecedented levels, with over 1.3 million cases pending as of 2021. This backlog means that individuals may have to wait years for their cases to be heard, leaving them in limbo and ensure of their future in the United States.

The USCIS, the agency responsible for processing immigration applications and petitions, has also been plagued by a significant backlog. As of 2021, the agency has over 6.3 million applications pending, including naturalization, green card applications, visa applications, and employment authorizations. This backlog has resulted in lengthy processing times, with some individuals waiting years for their applications to be adjudicated.

The backlog in both the Immigration Courts and the USCIS has far-reaching consequences for immigrants and their families. It can result in prolonged separation from loved ones, uncertainty about employment and housing, and a constant state of limbo and anxiety. Additionally, the backlog hinders the efficient and fair administration of the immigration system, leading to delays in resolution of cases and preventing individuals from moving forward with their lives in the United States.

There are various factors that have contributed to the backlog in the Immigration Courts and USCIS. The complexity of immigration laws and regulations, increased enforcement actions, and lack of resources and staffing have all played a role in creating this backlog. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated the situation, leading to court closures and processing delays.

Efforts are being made to address the backlog in both Immigration Courts and USCIS. The Biden administration has proposed more judges and staff, improved technology and infrastructure, and streamline processes. Additionally, there have been calls for legislative reforms to the immigration system to address the root causes for the backlog and ensure a more efficient and fain adjudication of cases.

In conclusion, the backlog in the Immigration Courts and USCIS is a pressing issue that has significant implications for immigrants and their families. It is essential for efforts to be made to address this backlog, to ensure timely and fair resolution for immigration cases, and to provide individuals with the certainty and stability the need to build their lives in the United States.

THE WHITE HOUSE’S POTENTIAL OVERHAUL OF AMERICAN’S ASYLUM SYSTEM: A LAST-DITCH EFFORT TO SECURE REPUBLICAN SUPPORT FOR THE SPENDING BILL

Posted on by

> The White House’s consideration of significant changes to America’s Asylum System and nationwide expansion of authority to expeditiously remove people from the interior represents a dramatic shift in U.S. immigration policy. The proposed changes are being viewed as a last-gasp effort to garner Republican support for a necessary supplemental spending bill. However, the potential consequences of these changes raise serious concerns and should be carefully considered.

One major consequence of these proposed changes is the potential violation of international human rights enshrined in international law, and any attempt to drastically alter the asylum system could be seen as violation of these standards. The expansion of authority to expedite removals from the interior could also lead to issues of due process and the risk of departing individuals who genuinely fear persecution in their home countries.

Furthermore, the changes could lead to an increase in the number of individuals being deported, including those who have established lives in the United States. This could have devasting consequences for families and communities, tearing apart the fabric of society and causing immense human suffering. Additionally, a rapid expansion of deportations could strain resources and infrastructure, leading to logistic challenges and potential human rights abuses in detention facilities.

In addition the proposed changes could engender a climate of fear and uncertainty among immigrant communities. The threat of expedited removals and significant changes to the asylum system could deter individuals from seeking protection and accessing necessary services. This could lead to further marginalization and vulnerability for already vulnerable population.

From a political perspective, the proposed changes could further polarize an already deeply divided issue. While the White House may hope to gain Republican support for Supplemental Spending Bill, the potential impact of these changes on immigrant communities and human rights could result in backlash and further alienation.

In conclusion, the consequences of the proposed changes to America’s Asylum System and the nationwide expansion of authority to expeditiously remove people from the interior are deeply concerning. The potential violations of international human rights standards, the impact on families and communities, the climate of fear among immigrant populations, and the potential for further political polarization all points to the need for careful consideration and deliberation. The implications of these changes go beyond political expediency and require a thoughtful and through examination of their impact on vulnerable populations and the foundational principles of international human rights.

REFUGEE STATUS

Posted on by

Refugee law may be the world’s most powerful international human rights mechanism. Not only do millions of people invoke its protections every year in countries spanning globe, but they do so on the basis of a self-actuating mechanism of international law that, quite literally, allows at-risk persons to vote with their feet. This is because, as the United Nations High Commissioners of Refugees (“UNHR”) has insisted, refugee status is not a status that is granted by states; it is rather simply recognized by them:
“A person is a refugee within the meaning of the 1951 Convention as soon as he fulfills the criteria contained in the definition. This would necessarily occur prior to the time at which his refugee status is formally determined. Recognition of his refugee status does not therefore make him a refugee but declares him to be one. He does not become a refugee because of recognition but is recognized because he a refugee.” See UNHCR, Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, UN Doc. HCR/IP/4/Eng/REV.3 (2011).

Translations

O direito dos refugiados pode ser o mecanismo internacional de direitos humanos mais poderoso do mundo. Não só milhões de pessoas invocam as suas protecções todos os anos em países do mundo, como o fazem com base num mecanismo de auto-actuação do direito internacional que, literalmente, permite que pessoas em risco votem com os pés. Isso porque, como insistiu o Alto Comissariado das Nações Unidas para os Refugiados (“UNHR”), o status de refugiado não é um status concedido pelos Estados; é simplesmente reconhecido por eles:

“Uma pessoa é refugiada na acepção da Convenção de 1951 logo que preencha os critérios contidos na definição. Isso ocorreria necessariamente antes do momento em que seu status de refugiado é formalmente determinado. O reconhecimento do seu estatuto de refugiado não o torna portanto um refugiado, mas declara-o como tal. Ele não se torna refugiado por reconhecimento, mas é reconhecido porque é refugiado.” Ver ACNUR, Estatuto dos Refugiados ao abrigo da Convenção de 1951 e do Protocolo de 1967 relativo ao Estatuto dos Refugiados, Documento das Nações Unidas”

El derecho de los refugiados puede ser el mecanismo internacional de derechos humanos más poderoso del mundo. Millones de personas no solo invocan sus protecciones cada año en países de todo el mundo, sino que lo hacen sobre la base de un mecanismo de derecho internacional que, literalmente, permite a las personas en riesgo votar con los pies. Esto se debe a que, como ha insistido el Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (“ACNUR”), la condición de refugiado no es una condición otorgada por los Estados; Es más bien simplemente reconocido por ellos: “Una persona es refugiada en el sentido de la Convención de 1951 tan pronto como cumple los criterios contenidos en la definición. Esto ocurriría necesariamente antes del momento en que se determine formalmente su condición de refugiado. Por lo tanto, el reconocimiento de su condición de refugiado no lo convierte en refugiado, sino que lo declara como tal. No se convierte en refugiado por el reconocimiento, sino que es reconocido por ser refugiado”. Véase ACNUR.

难民法可能是世界上最强大的国际人权机制。不仅每年在世界各国有数百万人援引其保护，而且他们这样做的基础是国际法的自我驱动机制，从字面上看，允许处于危险之中的人用脚投票。这是因为，正如联合国难民事务高级专员（“UNHR”）所坚持的那样，难民地位不是国家授予的身份;他们相当简单地认识到： “一个人只要符合1951年《公约》的定义所载标准，即为该公约所指的难民。这必然发生在正式确定他的难民地位之前。因此，承认他的难民地位并不使他成为难民，而是宣布他为难民。他不是因为被承认而成为难民，而是因为他是难民而被承认。见难民署，《1951年公约》和1967年《关于难民地位的议定书》规定的难民地位，联合国文件HCR/IP/4/Eng/REV.3（2011年）。

শরণার্থী আইন বিশ্বের সবচেয়ে শক্তিশালী আন্তর্জাতিক মানবাধিকার ব্যবস্থা হতে পারে। বিশ্বজুড়ে ছড়িয়ে থাকা দেশগুলিতে প্রতি বছর লক্ষ লক্ষ মানুষ কেবল এর সুরক্ষাই প্রয়োগ করে না, তবে তারা আন্তর্জাতিক আইনের একটি স্ব-কার্যকর প্রক্রিয়ার ভিত্তিতে এটি করে যা আক্ষরিক অর্থে ঝুঁকিপূর্ণ ব্যক্তিদের তাদের পা দিয়ে ভোট দেওয়ার অনুমতি দেয়। এর কারণ, জাতিসংঘের শরণার্থী বিষয়ক হাইকমিশনাররা (“ইউএনএইচআর”) যেমন জোর দিয়ে বলেছেন, শরণার্থী মর্যাদা এমন একটি মর্যাদা নয় যা রাষ্ট্রগুলি দ্বারা প্রদত্ত হয়; এটি বরং তাদের দ্বারা স্বীকৃত: “একজন ব্যক্তি ১৯৫১ সালের কনভেনশনের অর্থের মধ্যে শরণার্থী হন যখনই তিনি সংজ্ঞায় অন্তর্ভুক্ত মানদণ্ডগুলি পূরণ করেন। এটি অবশ্যই তার শরণার্থী অবস্থা আনুষ্ঠানিকভাবে নির্ধারিত সময়ের আগে ঘটবে। তার শরণার্থী মর্যাদার স্বীকৃতি তাই তাকে শরণার্থী করে তোলে না বরং তাকে একজন হিসাবে ঘোষণা করে। স্বীকৃতির কারণে তিনি শরণার্থী হন না, বরং শরণার্থী হওয়ার কারণে তিনি স্বীকৃতি পান। দেখুন ইউএনএইচসিআর, ১৯৫১ সালের কনভেনশনের অধীনে শরণার্থী অবস্থা এবং শরণার্থীদের অবস্থা সম্পর্কিত ১৯৬৭ সালের প্রোটোকল, ইউএন ডক এইচসিআর / আইপি / ৪ / ইং / আরইভি .৩ (২০১১)

Ligji për refugjatët mund të jetë mekanizmi më i fuqishëm ndërkombëtar i të drejtave të njeriut në botë. Jo vetëm që miliona njerëz i përdorin mbrojtjet e saj çdo vit në vendet që shtrihen në glob, por e bëjnë këtë në bazë të një mekanizmi vetë-aktivizues të së drejtës ndërkombëtare që, fjalë për fjalë, lejon personat në rrezik të votojnë me këmbët e tyre. Kjo sepse, siç kanë këmbëngulur Komisionerët e Lartë të Kombeve të Bashkuara për Refugjatët (“UNHR”), statusi i refugjatit nuk është një status që jepet nga shtetet; Ajo është mjaft thjesht e njohur prej tyre: “Një person është refugjat në kuptimin e Konventës së vitit 1951 sapo plotëson kriteret e përmbajtura në përkufizim. Kjo do të ndodhte domosdoshmërisht përpara kohës në të cilën statusi i tij i refugjatit përcaktohet zyrtarisht. Njohja e statusit të tij të refugjatit nuk e bën atë një refugjat, por e deklaron atë të jetë një. Ai nuk bëhet refugjat për shkak të

Das Flüchtlingsrecht ist vielleicht der mächtigste internationale Menschenrechtsmechanismus der Welt. Nicht nur, dass sich jedes Jahr Millionen von Menschen in Ländern auf der ganzen Welt auf ihren Schutz berufen, sie tun dies auch auf der Grundlage eines selbsttätigen Mechanismus des Völkerrechts, der es gefährdeten Personen buchstäblich erlaubt, mit den Füßen abzustimmen. Dies liegt daran, dass, wie der Hohe Flüchtlingskommissar der Vereinten Nationen (“UNHR”) betont hat, der Flüchtlingsstatus kein Status ist, der von Staaten gewährt wird; Es wird von ihnen eher einfach erkannt: “Flüchtling im Sinne der Konvention von 1951 ist, wer die in der Definition enthaltenen Kriterien erfüllt. Dies würde notwendigerweise vor dem Zeitpunkt.‘
Le droit des réfugiés est peut-être le mécanisme international des droits de l’homme le plus puissant au monde. Non seulement des millions de personnes invoquent ses protections chaque année dans des pays du monde entier, mais elles le font sur la base d’un mécanisme de droit international qui s’active automatiquement et qui, littéralement, permet aux personnes à risque de voter avec leurs pieds. En effet, comme l’a insisté le Haut-Commissariat des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés (UNHR), le statut de réfugié n’est pas un statut accordé par les États ; c’est plutôt simplement reconnu par eux : « Une personne est considérée comme réfugiée au sens de la Convention de 1951 dès lors qu’elle remplit les critères contenus dans la définition. Cela se.

MATRIMONIAL FRAUD AND ITS CONSEQUENCES

Posted on by

“Marriage fraud,” that is to enter into or endeavor to enter into a marriage for the sole purpose of procuring immigration benefits, is a very serious charge in the immigration context.

Attempting to procure or procuring immigration benefits through a sham marriage can lead to inadmissibility and/or deportation, depending on the alien’s situation.

In the case of Salas-Velazquez, the Petitioner who was a native and citizen of Mexico entered the United States as a visitor for pleasure. He purported to marry a citizen of the United States, and, on the basis of that alleged marriage, filed a petition to adjust his status to that of a permanent resident alien. That petition was denied in 1989 on the ground that the marriage was fraudulent, entered into for the purpose of evading the immigration laws. Almost two years later, in 1991, the Immigration and Naturalization Service served petitioner with an order to show cause, charging him with deportability.

A hearing was held before an immigration judge, during which petitioner made a motion for adjustment of status based on a second marriage, also to a United States citizen. There was no dispute as to the genuineness of the second marriage. The immigration judge denied this motion. Later, the judge found that petitioner’s first marriage was fraudulent, that petitioner and his first wife never lived together, and that petitioner contracted the marriage for the purpose of immigrating to the United States. On the basis of this evidence, the judge sustained the charges of deportability. Salas-Velazquez v. INS. 34 F. 3d 705 – Court of Appeals. 8th Circuit 1994.

Beside of the severity immigration consequences, a person who enters into a marriage for the purpose of evading any provision of the INA can be prosecuted and if convicted, faces term of imprisonment for up to five years, a fine of up to $250,000.00, or both imprisonment and a fine. See 8 U.S.C. § 1325(c).

Biden Administration and Immigration in 2022

Posted on by

CNN — How many times has the Biden White House had an unresolved conflict between idealism and pragmatism on the issue of immigration? How many times has it hesitated to take action, opting instead for political messaging? The sad answer to both questions is: every time.

Most of the officials appointed by President Joe Biden to work on immigration have resigned in frustration, according to a bombshell report from The New York Times in April. “The White House has been divided by furious debates over how – and whether – to proceed in the face of a surge of migrants crossing the southwest border,” the report said.

Some wanted more openness to immigrants of all kinds. Others wanted a coherent set of rules to be applied to the millions of people at the border. And some others wanted a compromise with Republicans to create a new merit-based, green-card system. They all got nothing.

A new report from the Department of Homeland Security for August confirmed over 2 million border apprehensions and expulsions this year so far. Previously, the United States only experienced more than 1 1/2 million apprehensions a few times in its history: during the late 1990s and then in 2021. At the current pace, that record could be doubled by the end of this year. And next year, if no policies change, it could double again…

Open border chaos increases human trafficking and drug trafficking. It turns what should be a foreign policy strength into a national security weakness.

When we ponder what Biden should do to address the immigration mess at the border, the honest answer is: something, anything. Because the status quo of playing politics while seemingly ignoring policy is not only politically divisive, but it’s also missing a golden opportunity.

Biden should take advantage of his moment in history to boldly reform American refugee policy. He could, at the stroke of a pen, redefine how many refugees are allowed into the United States by taking advantage of the distinction our laws make between those granted temporary protection and those awarded permanent residency.

Editor’s Note: Tim Kane is the president of the American Lyceum and a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution. His most recent book is “The Immigrant Superpower.” The views expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion on CNN.https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/05/opinions/immigration-policy-biden-administration-kane/index.html

DHS Announces New Migration Enforcement Process for Venezuelans

Posted on by

Venezuelans who seek to enter the U.S. illegally will be returned to Mexico; New lawful pathway created for some Venezuelans.

As part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s ongoing work to build a fair, orderly, and secure immigration system, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced joint actions with Mexico to reduce the number of people arriving at our Southwest border and create a more orderly and safe process for people fleeing the humanitarian and economic crisis in Venezuela.

The United States and Mexico intend to address the most acute irregular migration and help ease pressure on the cities and states receiving these individuals.

Effective immediately, Venezuelans who enter the United States between ports of entry, without authorization, will be returned to Mexico. At the same time, the United States and Mexico are reinforcing their coordinated enforcement operations to target human smuggling organizations and bring them to justice. That campaign will include new migration checkpoints, additional resources and personnel, joint targeting of human smuggling organizations, and expanded information sharing related to transit nodes, hotels, stash houses, and staging locations. The United States is also planning to offer additional security assistance to support regional partners to address the migration challenges in the Darién Gap.

To reduce the irregular migration of Venezuelans also includes a new process to lawfully and safely bring up to 24,000 qualifying Venezuelans into the United States. The United States will not implement this process without Mexico keeping in place its independent but parallel effort to accept the return of Venezuelan nationals who bypass this process and attempt to enter irregularly.

“These actions make clear that there is a lawful and orderly way for Venezuelans to enter the United States, and lawful entry is the only way,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas. “Those who attempt to cross the southern border of the United States illegally will be returned to Mexico and will be ineligible for this process in the future. Those who follow the lawful process will have the opportunity to travel safely to the United States and become eligible to work here.” https://www.dhs.gov/news/2022/10/12/dhs-announces-new-migration-enforcement-process-venezuelans

The Current State Of The DACA Program

Posted on by

On Oct. 5, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a decision on the 2012 Deferred Action for Child Arrivals (DACA) policy. The court partially affirmed the district court’s July 2021 decision declaring the 2012 DACA policy unlawful. However, the court of appeals preserved the partial stay issued by the district court in July 2021 and remanded the case back to the district court for further proceedings regarding the new DHS DACA regulation published on Aug. 30, 2022 and scheduled to go into effect on Oct. 31, 2022.

At this time, this ruling does not affect current grants of DACA and related Employment Authorization Documents. Consistent with the court’s order [PDF] (PDF) and the ongoing partial stay, we will continue to accept and process renewal DACA requests, accompanying requests for employment authorization, and applications for advance parole for current DACA recipients, and will continue to accept but not process initial DACA requests.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) today announced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) final rule, which has been posted for public inspection on the Federal Register’s website. The final rule generally codifies existing policies with limited amendments to preserve and fortify DACA. The final rule is effective Oct. 31, 2022.

Immigration Catch and Release Policy

Posted on by

The immigration “catch and release”  release policy is being re-upped by those same architects, enablers, and defenders of the former President Donald Trump’s cruelty and chaos to attack the Biden’s Administration and for overtly political reasons.

Some Republicans say the catch and release policy helps undocumented immigrants disappear; many immigrants say it has prevented them from following the government’s instructions.

Is it true?

Let’s define the immigration term “Catch and Release.”

“Catch and release” is a term used to describe the process through which certain immigrants are apprehended and released from Department of Homeland Security (DHS) custody pending their immigration court proceedings. This is an incorrect term, as it incorrectly implies that individuals apprehended along the U.S./Mexico border are released from DHS custody without consideration, monitoring, or consequence. This is not true.

Detaining individuals who present no safety or flight risk has both human and economic costs. It needlessly robs these individuals of their dignity and is a drain on limited DHS resources. In fact, costs in FY19 were $124 per individual/per day for those in adult detention and $319 per individual/per day for those in family detention. See Dep’t of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Budget Overview Congressional Justification, Fiscal Year 2018, 128 (2018), available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CFO/17_0524_U.S._Immigration_and_Customs_Enforcement.pdf.

Furthermore, many migrants entering the United States are seeking protection and already have strong community ties upon arrival, strengthening their incentive to comply with immigration requirements. These individuals are often received by family members and friends who have been in the country for some time and are eager to help their loved ones integrate into their new communities.

Other immigrants have been allowed into the country for a variety of reasons, including a lack of detention space because of pandemic precautions. The Biden administration has made some exceptions for humanitarian reasons, particularly for families and children.

Are individuals who are released from DHS custody after apprehension along the U.S./Mexico border subject to monitoring from the U.S. federal government?

Absolutely. DHS has a spectrum of humane, proven, and cost-effective alternatives to detention that it can utilize to monitor released individuals and families. The Border Patrol receives and in-process” illegal aliens at Border Patrol facilities, “conducts and documents personal property inventories, performs welfare checks, transports noncitizens with a Border Patrol agent escort, coordinates logistical and additional travel requirements, and performs various administrative duties, such as processing notes and completing paper/electronic file transfers.

In many instances, people released from DHS custody at the U.S./Mexico border are put on GPS monitoring, such as an ankle monitor, which tracks their movements electronically; these individuals are also required to report to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) field offices periodically. Other forms of monitoring include release on bond and telephonic monitoring.

Do individuals released along the U.S/Mexico border have the responsibility to comply with their immigration court proceedings?

Yes.  All individuals who are apprehended along the U.S./Mexico border are subject to U.S. immigration laws. The large majority of those who have been apprehended between ports of entry have been put into removal or “deportation” proceedings and accordingly, need to comply with the requirements of the immigration authorities, including showing up to present themselves and their case in immigration court. Those seeking a form of relief, such as asylum, have particularly high incentives to comply with their court proceedings.

Individuals have been allowed into the country for a variety of reasons, including a lack of detention space because of pandemic precautions. The Biden Administration has made exceptions for humanitarian reasons, particularly for families and children.

Who is telling the truth? You decide.