Results

This advisory provides an overview of ICE’s new “victim-centered” approach to immigration enforcement based on an August 2021 directive, including who qualifies as a victim and which ICE actions are covered. As part of this new approach, ICE officers and agents are instructed to look out for and in various circumstances exercise prosecutorial discretion in favor of noncitizen survivors of crime as part of their decisions to arrest, detain, release, and refer noncitizens.

A reference sheet on the immigration consequences of delinquency and diagnostic questions for noncitizen youth: determining potential avenues for legal status.

This advisory provides practitioners with current information about the public charge ground of inadmissibility, including addressing what is public charge, who does it apply to, how is public charge evaluated, and could being a public charge make someone deportable.

This advisory gives an overview of the SIJS-based adjustment of status process. It will give step-by-step guidance for both the affirmative process, for young people who are not in removal proceedings, and for the defensive process, for young people who are in removal proceedings before the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

On March 7, 2022, U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) announced a new policy that applies to young people who have been granted Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) but are not yet able to become a green card holder because they are waiting for a visa to be available (“the visa backlog”). The new policy, which goes into effect May 6, 2022, provides for young people stuck in the visa backlog to be granted deferred action, which will allow them to apply for work authorization. This guide addresses some questions the community may have about this recent change.

A U visa is a type of immigration status for victims of certain crimes who have been helpful in the investigation or prosecution of that criminal activity. This one-page guide provides an overview on the U visa, what it provides, and who qualifies.

"An Overview to Special Immigrant Juvenile Status," excerpted from ILRC’s new publication Special Immigrant Juvenile Status and Other Immigration Options for Children & Youth. (Excerpted from Special Immigrant Juvenile Status and Other Immigration Options for Children & Youth.)

In recent years, California’s appellate courts have provided guidance on the state court’s role in Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) cases. The following decisions clarify many of the common questions that these cases present in state courts, including one-parent SIJS, notice and service issues, and the role of the state court.

This practice advisory contains numerous practical examples to assist in understanding how to recapture and retain priority dates in the family immigration context. It includes discussions and examples of how this concept intersects with other provisions of law, such as the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA), and adjustment of status under § 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). A brief discussion and summary of the utilization of cross-chargeability of priority dates is also included.

On January 25, 2022, the ILRC submitted comments in response to the DHS Notice Requesting Comments on “Identifying Recommendations To Support the Work of the Interagency Task Force on the Reunification of Families.” Our comments urge the U.S. government to stop criminal prosecutions for migration, admit wrongdoing and compensate the victims of family separation under the Trump Administration, curb enforcement and detention in the absence of meaningful opportunities for people to gain immigration status, rescind harmful border policies and practices, and expand the interpretation of family unity to ensure that children are not separated from both parental and non-parental caregivers.

On September 28, 2021, the Department of Homeland Security published a proposed federal regulation announcing its intent to codify Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). 

This short screening sheet is designed to help child welfare professionals identify potential avenues for immigrant youth to gain legal status.

This resource, written by Human Impact Partners in collaboration with the ILRC and others as part of the Dignity Not Detention Coalition, outlines recommendations for what healthy, just, and supportive immigration policy can look like for unaccompanied youth immigrating to the US, without relying on detention or detention-like facilities. Rooted in the stories, experiences, and recommendations of young people who arrived in the US as unaccompanied youth, this resource draws from public health evidence documenting the health harms of detention in large-scale, restrictive settings. It puts forward a vision for ending the current system of detaining unaccompanied minors in harmful settings and for shaping healthy, just, and supportive immigration policy for unaccompanied youth. You can also check this resource for more important information from Human Impact Partners.

T visas are a crucial but often underutilized form of relief for youth who have survived trafficking. This advisory gives an overview of special considerations practitioners should keep in mind when screening youth for T visa eligibility. It gives helpful tips that practitioners can use to ensure that they fully assess a child’s eligibility while minimizing retraumatization.

Children and youth compose a significant portion of the U.S. immigrant population and often qualify for various forms of immigration relief, many of which involve an application filing fee. Under the Trump administration, USCIS promulgated a final rule intended to dramatically raise fees for many immigration application forms, including those available to young people, and would have limited access to fee waivers. The rule was blocked by federal courts, and after President Biden took office, the Department of Justice decided not to defend the rule, so it never took effect and for now immigration filing fees remain at the previously set amounts. This advisory reviews some of the main forms of immigration relief available to children and youth and the current fees for each, and summarizes the litigation and related efforts that ultimately defeated the Trump fee rule.

In this practice advisory co-drafted with Public Counsel, we answer common questions on how to tackle disclosure of juvenile adjudications and dissemination of court records for individuals interested in applying for DACA. It also includes a sample DACA request packet, which shows various ways to disclose juvenile adjudications and comply with state confidentiality laws.

The majority of states have legalized some use of marijuana, but marijuana remains a federal Schedule I controlled substance. Therefore, any conduct involving marijuana can be very dangerous for immigrants – including conduct that is permitted under state law. Admitting that one has “legally” used marijuana, being employed in the fast-growing cannabis industry, and any conviction can cause serious immigration problems. A prior marijuana conviction must be vacated based on some error; the fact that the state has since legalized the conduct does not erase it, and many state “mass expungement” actions also do not. Evidence that a person has sold marijuana can harm any noncitizen, in some cases including immigrant youth. Marijuana issues can cause bars to eligibility for affirmative applications such as adjustment of status and naturalization; admission at the border; and cancellation and other applications in removal proceedings. 

This page provides several tools: an updated and a comprehensive Practice Advisory on the legal issues; a Practice Alert on the Policy Manualamendment; community flyers that you can download and use to help warn clients and community; and a sample written warning about working in the industry from the California Employment Development Department.

In April, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) put out a request for public input regarding Identifying Barriers Across U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Benefits and Services. The ILRC has submitted these comments.

Applicants must meet certain requirements to be eligible for DACA, including showing that they have been continuously residing in the United States since June 15, 2007. Acquiring documents to use as evidence to prove the continuous residence requirement can be tedious. As such, this resource focuses on the types of evidence initial DACA applicants can gather to prove continuous residence and where applicants can get this evidence.

This resource, co-written with Detention Watch Network, answers common questions about the increased numbers of unaccompanied children arriving at the border and the government’s opening of “influx facilities” and “emergency intake sites” in response. It also provides guidance for responding to a new facility opening in your community.

In the summer of 2020, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published two regulatory rules relating to eligibility for employment authorization documents (EADs) for individuals with pending asylum applications. Both rules went into effect in August 2020. This advisory provides a summary of the rules and the preliminary injunction currently in effect for members of Casa de Maryland (CASA) and Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP). The end of this advisory contains a helpful chart for quick reference, outlining current eligibility requirements for an EAD based on a pending asylum application, and which provisions are temporarily enjoined by the case Casa de Maryland v. Wolf, No. 8:20-CV-02118-PX, 2020 WL 5500165 (D. Md. Sept. 11, 2020), for certain organizational members.

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 confers initial jurisdiction over asylum claims filed by unaccompanied children (UCs) to the asylum office. The Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision in Matter of M-A-C-O-, as well as policy changes by the Trump administration have sought to strip away this crucial protection from many child asylum seekers. Because of these changes and legal challenges by immigrant youth advocates, the current landscape of initial UC asylum jurisdiction is in flux. This practice advisory provides an overview of the current state of UC asylum jurisdiction following the Matter of M-A-C-O- decision and issuance of the Lafferty Memo. It also discusses the ongoing JOP v. DHS litigation and gives some arguments and tips for practitioners to help them advocate for their UC clients to receive the statutory protections afforded by the TVPRA. 

California is in the midst of an historic reform of its youth prisons, known as the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). Failed DJJ facilities will close, creating an opportunity for youth to be cared for close to home through community-based programs and services. This short resource describes steps that community-based advocates must take to ensure that the closure addresses the needs of ALL impacted communities, including immigrant youth. 

On September 25, ILRC submitted comments in opposition to EOIR's proposed rule regarding court procedures. The proposed rule is an unlawful attempt to curb Immigration Judges’ authority, limit case review, and drastically restrict due process for immigrants. The rule undermines the appellate process and curtails the efficient adjudication of the courts. 

California is in the midst of an historic reform of its Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). Under current plans, failed DJJ facilities will close, creating an opportunity for youth to be cared for close to home through community-based programs and services. But if DJJ closes, it must close justly. Any closure must divest from carceral solutions and invest in restorative and transformative justice rooted in community wellness and safety. Any closure must take into account the needs of all impacted communities, including immigrant youth. This resource highlights the two main ways that noncitizen youth may be impacted by the DJJ closure and makes recommendations to ensure that DJJ closes justly for all.

This resource provides helpful charts of the grounds of inadmissibility as applied to special immigrant juveniles (SIJs). It also describes the waiver standard and process for SIJs.