Asylum

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.

On May 11, 2023, the Biden administration issued a new regulation creating a bar to asylum for people arriving at the southern U.S. border with certain narrow exceptions. Although there is an ongoing court challenge, the bar, known as the “lawful pathways” rule, remains in effect. This Community Alert explores the exceptions to the bar with a focus on some of the exceptions that apply to children and youth traveling with their families.

On August 1, 2023, USCIS published long-awaited Policy Manual guidance on the definition and process for determining statelessness. ILRC commented favorably on most of the guidance and made suggestions for some improvements.

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.

Immigration law demonizes people whom it labels as “drug abusers and addicts,” “habitual drunkards,” and “alcoholics.” The implication is that they are morally weak, dangerous, or evil. An immigrant who comes within such a category can be found inadmissible and ineligible to establish good moral character, and can be denied several forms of immigration relief as well as naturalization. But from a scientific perspective, these people suffer from a substance use disorder (SUD), a medical condition that frequently arises after the person has undergone severe trauma. Substance Use Disorder is a growing health crisis that currently affects over 20 million people in the United States.

This Advisory is written by immigration attorneys and medical doctors specializing in SUD, to examine the issue from both perspectives. Part I of the advisory discusses the several immigration law penalties based on substance use (even when use has not risen to a disorder) and suggests legal defense strategies. Part II of the advisory reviews current medical information about the disorders and discusses how this information can address questions that arise in immigration proceedings.

On March 27, 2023, the ILRC submitted comments on the Biden Administration’s proposed rule that would impose a rebuttable presumption against eligibility for asylum for those who transited through a third country before arriving in the United States. The ILRC detailed concerns with how this rule will essentially ban a large number of asylum-seekers from relief and how the rule impermissibly restricts the due process rights of asylum-seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border.