Legalization

"Finality" of Removal Orders for Judicial Review Purposes

The Immigration and Nationality Act authorizes the courts of appeals to review “final” removal orders. This Practice Advisory addresses whether a removal decision issued by an Immigration Judge or the BIA is a “final” removal order for purposes of federal court review.

Published On: Tuesday, August 5, 2008 | Download File

New Numbers from U.S. Sentencing Commission Reveal Dysfunction of U.S. Immigration System

Published on Thu, Dec 01, 2011

By Walter Ewing

The broken U.S. immigration system is flooding federal courts with low-level cases involving non-violent defendants, and inundating federal prisons with individuals whose only crime was to enter or remain in the country without permission. Thanks to this ever-widening immigration dragnet, a disproportionateshare of the Latinos and non-U.S. citizens who wind up in federal courts and prisons are there solely because of immigration violations. In other words, the federal government is wasting its limited law-enforcement and criminal-justice resources on immigrants who do not pose a threat to public safety or national security.

These are the inescapable conclusions to emerge from a statistical report released in September by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. The statistics, which cover the first nine months of Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, illustrate the degree to which immigration cases are being channeled into federal court rooms. Immigration offenses accounted for more than one third (35.1 percent) of all federal sentences handed down during this period.1 In comparison, immigration offenses comprised one in five (19.6 percent) of all sentences in FY 2000.Read more...

Published in the Cornerstone: A National Legal Aid and Defender Association Publication

Remands to the BIA

In an amicus brief submitted in Castaneda-Castillo v. Gonzales, the LAC argued that the First Circuit should uphold the majority panel’s decision not to remand the case to the BIA pursuant to the “ordinary remand rule” established in INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12 (2002). While the ordinary remand rule requires remand when the BIA has not yet had the opportunity to consider an issue, the LAC argued that the rule does not apply where the BIA has thoroughly examined a particular issue but reached a wrong conclusion. When the BIA has addressed an issue in the first instance, the LAC argues, the court of appeals has authority to reverse the finding when the record compels the opposite conclusion.

CASES

Castaneda-Castillo v. Gonzales, No. 05-2384 (1st Circuit amicus brief filed Mar. 6, 2007). The court issued a precedent decision declining to follow the ordinary remand rule. Castaneda-Castillo v. Gonzales, 464 F.3d 112 (1st Cir. 2006).

U.S. Immigration Services Improves Access to Legal Counsel for Immigrants

Published on Sun, Jan 22, 2012

During its nine-year history, issues have arisen with respect to restrictions on counsel by the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration agencies. Tuesday, in response to calls from the American Immigration Council and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued immediate, comprehensive changes to their policies to ensure an appropriate role for attorneys in the immigration process.

Many non-citizens are forced to navigate the immigration process without representation because they cannot afford an attorney. But even persons who can afford one, or are represented by a pro bono attorney, have at times faced severe restrictions on their representation. This is particularly troublesome given the significant power USCIS officers wield. For example, they decide whether a non-citizen is entitled to stay in the U.S. or not. The assistance of an attorney well versed in the complexities of immigration law can help safeguard the rights of these non-citizens and ensure just outcomes.

By revising its guidance, USCIS has responded to some of the most serious access concerns. For example, the new guidance provides that an attorney generally may sit next to his or her client during an interview, may be permitted to submit relevant documents to the USCIS officer, and may raise objections to inappropriate lines of questioning.

The American Immigration Council looks forward to commenting on the new guidance and working with the agency to make sure it is followed. The other immigration agencies – Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement – should take note of USCIS’s commitment to improving access to counsel and take similar steps to recognize the meaningful role that attorneys play in protecting noncitizens’ rights.

Published in the Hispanically Speaking News

Immigrant legalization viewed as a boon

Published on Fri, Jan 08, 2010

Legalizing the status of the roughly 12 million unauthorized immigrants living in this country would create jobs, increase wages and boost the sagging U.S. economy, an academic study released Thursday says.

Published in the San Antonio Express

Quick Fact: U.S. naturalization fees extremely high

U.S. naturalization fees are now higher than in 25 of the 30 other MIPEX countries.

President Obama sends National Guard to secure U.S. Mexican border

Published on Wed, May 26, 2010

Watch Benjamin Johnson, Director of the American Immigration Council, discuss SB 1070 and racial profiling.Read more...

Published in the NBC News

Immigration reform needed for U.S. economy and for Haiti

Published on Sun, May 09, 2010

Marie, a Haitian mother, couldn't have been more grateful. "Thank you God for TPS," she recently told an attorney helping her fill out forms that will protect her from deportation. She was referring to temporary protected status, which will allow her to work legally, help Haiti and support her two young children. It's the sentiment that we hear most these days.

As longtime advocates, we at Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center were gratified when the Department of Homeland Security granted temporary protected status to unauthorized Haitian immigrants after the catastrophic earthquake in Haiti. Temporary protected status will allow perhaps 100,000 Haitians to legalize their status for the next 18 months.

Published in the CNN

David Shirk, Ph.D.

Dr. David Shirk received his Ph.D. in Political Science at the University of California, San Diego, and joined the Political Science Department at the University of San Diego in 2003. He serves as the Director of the Trans‐Border Institute and conducts research and publishes on topics related to Mexican politics, U.S.‐Mexican relations, and law enforcement and security issues along the U.S.‐Mexican border. Dr. Shirk is the Principal Investigator for TBI's Justice in Mexico Project, a bi‐national research initiative focused on criminal justice and the rule of law in Mexico that is sponsored by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Tinker Foundation. He has been a fellow at the Center for U.S.‐Mexican Studies (1998‐99; 2002‐04) and at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (2009‐10).