Results

Under current USCIS regulations, any person under 21 years of age who otherwise meets the eligibility requirements may be granted SIJS. This practice alert addresses many of the unsuccessful arguments that USCIS has not accepted when a petition received by USCIS after the youth turns 21. In rare cases, USCIS has accepted petitions received after the petitioner’s 21st birthday when there is proof that the petition was improperly rejected or receipted by USCIS before the deadline. This practice alert primarily focuses on USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) decisions and limited federal court cases to highlight successful and unsuccessful arguments when the SIJS petition is filed on or after the youth’s 21st birthday.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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 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.

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.