Results

This practice advisory provides an overview of the grounds of inadmissibility for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) explaining which grounds do not apply to TPS applicants, which grounds are non-waivable, and which grounds are waivable. It also offers an overview of the TPS waiver of inadmissibility.

Conviction of “obstruction of justice” is an aggravated felony if a sentence of a year or more is imposed. In Pugin v. Garland, No. 22-23 (June 22, 2023), the Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s definition of obstruction, but failed to provide a clear definition of its own. Now some California offenses are likely aggravated felonies if there is a sentence of year or more, including Penal Code §§ 32, 69, 136.1, 148, Vehicle Code § 10851, and others.

This Advisory discusses California offenses under Pugin, and discusses California criminal sentencing dispositions that avoid a sentence of a year or more for immigration purposes.

This is the second part of a two-part practice advisory on how to effectively challenge an immigration judge's adverse credibility finding with the Board of Immigration Appeals. The two advisories should be read together, as neither part is complete on its own. This second part of the advisory discusses how to challenge adverse credibility findings based on a witness's demeanor or responsiveness; findings that are based on an immigration judge's speculation and conjecture, particularly regarding the plausibility of a claim; and determinations regarding a respondent’s corroborative evidence. It also flags special circumstances to look out for when appealing an immigration judge's adverse credibility finding.

This practice advisory covers ways to gather information to determine whether your client might be inadmissible, how to address inadmissibility issues when applying for U nonimmigrant status, and how to file for an inadmissibility waiver for a U nonimmigrant applicant.

This practice alert provides an overview of new USCIS policy guidance and a recent BIA case that now officially acknowledge that the three- and ten-year unlawful presence bars can run in the United States. This practice alert summarizes current policy on the three- and ten-year bars as well as covering who does (and does not) benefit from this policy.

This advisory provides basic information on how to obtain the SIJS predicate order in juvenile court. It describes the benefits, requirements, and deadlines associated with SIJS, and discusses the role of the juvenile defense or children’s attorney in the process. It includes a sample SIJS predicate order from juvenile justice proceedings.

On September 13, 2023, Judge Andrew S. Hanen, a federal judge in the Southern District of Texas, ruled that the Biden administration’s final DACA rule, issued in August 2022, is unlawful. Judge Hanen previously ruled in July 2021 that the 2012 DACA memorandum, which preceded the rule, was. His earlier ruling was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, but the appellate court sent the case back to Judge Hanen to consider whether there are any material differences between the DACA rule and the 2012 memo.

This Practice Alert goes over Judge Hanen’s latest ruling. It’s important to note that the amended order does not change the status quo. Current DACA recipients, or those whose DACA has lapsed for less than a year, can continue to renew their DACA and work authorization, as well as apply for Advance Parole. However, first-time DACA applications continue to be blocked and cannot be processed.

This practice advisory covers what to do when inadmissibility factors are discovered or triggered outside the U petitioning process such as after applying for or receiving U nonimmigrant status, adjusting status through INA § 245(m), adjusting status under a different petition, or traveling outside the country.

Protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) is an important relief option for individuals who are unable to qualify for asylum or withholding of removal. This advisory reviews the legal standard for CAT protection. It also provides an overview of seminal Board of Immigration Appeals and federal circuit court decisions that discuss the various elements of a CAT claim. The end of the advisory contains a useful chart which compares asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT.

This advisory analyzes and explains the particularly serious crime bar to asylum and withholding of removal. It describes the factors to consider in determining whether a crime is a "particularly serious crime" and how to challenge a particularly serious crime determination.

This practice advisory addresses what a practitioner can and should do when DHS submits an I-213 to prove “alienage” or any other facts in a case. After a brief discussion of the purpose of an I-213 and why DHS often submits it during removal proceedings, this advisory discusses objections that practitioners should consider making in order to exclude the I-213 from the record in removal proceedings or, at a minimum, to argue that the I-213 should not be given any significant weight by the immigration judge. It discusses how to overcome the presumption that I-213s are inherently trustworthy and concludes with a synopsis of when and how to submit a motion to suppress in cases involving regulatory or constitutional violations.

Law enforcement agencies in California have been responding to requests for U visa certifications for many years to allow immigrant survivors of crime and their family members to apply for U nonimmigrant status. However, until 2016 there was no statewide standard or protocol for certifications. Several bills have passed in the meantime to further streamline the process. Most recently, AB 1261 was signed into law in October 2023 and went into effect on 01/01/2024. The Immigrant Legal Resource Center and the Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice wrote this advisory to summarize California state laws on U visa certifications, including the newest provisions.

Recently, USCIS has conflated guidance for naturalization disability waivers of English and civics with waivers of the oath requirement for persons with disabilities. The confusion stems from USCIS’s addition of a question on oath waivers on the N-648 disability waiver form. These are separate waivers with distinct purposes, legislative histories, and administrative guidance.

This practice advisory will describe the enactment of the oath waiver and current USCIS guidance as well as describe the ways that it is distinct from a waiver of the English/civics requirement.

In October 2021, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued its T Visa Law Enforcement Resource Guide. The guide, published alongside updated guidance on T visas in the USCIS Policy Manual (USCIS-PM), advises law enforcement agencies on providing T visa certifications, a crucial form of evidence in T visa applications. This practice advisory gives an overview of the resource guide and how practitioners can utilize it to advocate for law enforcement agencies to provide law enforcement certifications to survivors.

On February 14, 2024, President Biden announced an 18-month Program of deferred enforced departure (DED) for Palestinians in the United States. This alert describes the content of the executive order. Eligible persons may apply for employment and travel authorization under the program when a notice is published in the Federal Register.

This updated guidance, written with our partners Immigrant Legal Defense (ILD), International Rescue Committee (IRC), and Legal Services for Children (LSC), includes recommendations for what information to include in state court predicate orders for special immigrant juvenile status (SIJS) in California. It incorporates guidance from the 2022 SIJS regulations as well as the USCIS Policy Manual, and includes helpful citations to California law. It also includes sample predicate orders from family, probate, dependency, and delinquency courts.

The advisory provides information and updates on various parole programs including Uniting for Ukraine, Operation Allies Welcome, CHNV Parole, Family Reunification Parole, CAM Parole, and Parole in Place.

This practice advisory describes the new “Keeping Families Together” parole in place process for certain spouses and stepchildren of U.S. citizens including what exactly is it and what you get if approved. It also details the eligibility requirements and application process as well as addressing some of the more “in the weeds” issues such as if the USC spouse is deceased, common law marriages, the different presumptions that apply depending on the applicant’s criminal history or if they have an unexecuted final removal order, and what happens if the applicant has already started consular processing. Additionally, attached to this advisory is an appendix of online filing tips specific to the Form I-131F.

This advisory describes supporting documentation for the Parole in Place program under Keeping Families Together. The adjudications for this program are currently on pause due to litigation. Persons hoping to apply should the program resume may gather and prepare supporting documents in advance.

Part 1 of this 2-part advisory provides updates on DHS’s prosecutorial discretion in removal proceedings and explores the various factors that advocates should consider when deciding whether to seek a favorable exercise of discretion from the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA). Part 1 also highlights new regulations and discusses how the upcoming presidential election may impact prosecutorial discretion.

Part 2 of this 2-part advisory explores some of the unexpected consequences of PD policies adopted by the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA) that can prejudice noncitizens in removal proceedings, including the practice of moving to dismiss proceedings over respondents’ objections and failing to appear at hearings.

On October 25, 2019, the Attorney General published Matter of Thomas & Thompson holding that adjudicators could only recognize a sentence modification for immigration purposes where the sentence was vacated due to procedural or substantive defect as defined in Matter of Pickering. It was not clear whether this holding was retroactive. Under new DOJ regulations it is now clear that Matter of Thomas & Thompson is not retroactive. Adjudicators will recognize a sentence modification as vacating the sentence for immigration purposes where: (1) the person filed for the sentence modification on or before October 25, 2019; (2) the person relied on the availability to seek a sentence modification where the conviction date was on or before October 25, 2019; (3) there was a clerical or typographical error in the sentence regardless of the date of entry of the sentence; or (4) where the sentence was vacated due to a procedural or substantive defect in the sentencing - regardless of when the sentence modification was filed.