Having her family fall victim to the Trump Administration’s “zero tolerance” policy, which criminally prosecuted immigrants that crossed the US border without documentation and separated families as a consequence, Estela Juarez has written a children’s book with the help of Lissette Norman and illustrator Teresa Martin, titled “Until Someone Listens.” The book offers a personal account of Estela’s story of loss and lack of protection under our current immigration system, in the hopes that all who read will listen to the pressing need for immigration reform.
Read moreU.S. Department of Homeland Security: DHS and DOJ Issue Third-Country Asylum Rule
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced stricter eligibility qualifications for asylum seekers on July 15, 2019, according to a statement released by the DHS. The joint Interim Final Rule (IFR), published in the Federal Register as of July 16, 2019, denies asylum to any applicants who passed through a third country in transit to the United States but did not formally seek asylum in that country, with only a few exceptions.
Read moreDOJ and DHS Issue New Rule to Block Certain Asylum Seekers at US/Mexico Border
On November 8, Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen announced an Interim Final Rule declaring that foreign nationals “who contravene a presidential suspension or limitation on entry into the United States through the southern border with Mexico issued under section 212(f) or 215(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) will be rendered ineligible for asylum.” Under the new rule, based on the “Presidential Proclamation Addressing Mass Migration Through the Southern Border of the United States” that was signed by President Trump on November 9 the following day, migrants seeking asylum will have to make their claims only at official ports of entry on the border where according to the rule they will “be processed in a controlled, orderly, and lawful manner.”
Read moreThe Washington Post: “Federal Judge: Trump administration must accept new DACA applications”
A federal judge in Washington D.C. has ordered the government to continue the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and allow new applicants to apply, calling the Trump administration’s decision to rescind the program for the hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children “virtually unexplained” and “unlawful." In his decision, US District Judge John D. Bates writes that the Trump administration's decision “was arbitrary and capricious because the Department failed adequately to explain its conclusion that the program was unlawful" and that "each day that the agency delays is a day that aliens who might otherwise be eligible for initial grants of DACA benefits are exposed to removal because of an unlawful agency action.” Even so, Judge Bates has stayed his ruling for ninety days to give the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) time to provide a more detailed reason for ending the program; otherwise, the judge will rescind the memo that ended the DACA program and allow for new applicants.
Read moreThe Washington Post: “Justice Dept. to halt legal-advice program for immigrants in detention”
The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), an agency within the Department of Justice (DOJ) that adjudicates immigration cases and oversees the country’s immigration court system, has announced its intention to halt the Vera Institute of Justice’s Legal Orientation Program (LOP) while it audits the program’s cost-effectiveness. Vera’s LOP program offers legal educational services to detained immigrants. During the audit, the Trump administration will also evaluate the Vera Institute’s information “help desk,” which provides tips to immigrants who are not detained but still facing deportation. This announcement comes as DOJ attempts to deal with the massive backlog of approximately 650,000 immigration court cases by 2020. Earlier this month, the DOJ announced case quotas for immigration judges.
Read moreBusiness Insider: "A judge permanently blocked Trump's order that threatened federal grants to 'sanctuary cities'"
Last week, Judge William Orrick, a federal district judge for Northern California, permanently blocked President Trump’s executive order cutting federal funds to sanctuary cities that refuse to comply with federal efforts to detain and deport undocumented immigrants. In his ruling, the judge writes that the executive order violates the US Constitution’s principles of federalism and separation of powers. This decision is the result of a lawsuit brought by the city and county of San Francisco and Santa Clara County challenging the executive order issued in January this year that aimed to cut federal funding for cities which did not comply with a statute that prohibits state and local governments from refusing to relay information about the immigration status of those in their jurisdiction to federal immigration authorities. In his decision, Judge Orrick states: “The Counties have demonstrated that the Executive Order has caused and will cause them constitutional injuries by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving them of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights.”
Read moreOPINION: Trump and Immigration: What to Expect
It is no exaggeration to say that President-Elect Trump made immigration a centerpiece of his campaign, ever since the summer of 2015 when he launched it with his famous speech labeling Mexican immigrants drug dealers and rapists although some might be “good people.” He called for a total ban on Muslim immigration to the US, and applauded the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the injunction on President Obama’s expanded DACA/DAPA program. But now that he’s been elected, what can we expect from President Trump on immigration beginning next week on January 20?
Read moreHuffington Post: "Whoops! The Department of Justice Admits That It Misunderstood U.S. Citizenship Law"
The US government has been misinterpreting certain citizenship statutes since 2008 and has consequently been incorrectly ordering US citizens deported, reports Laura Murray-Tjan, the Director of the Federal Immigration Appeals Project. The Department of Justice (DOJ) admitted their mistake in a recent decision saying that they "misread" the legal requirements for legitimation. Murray-Tjan writes:
The DOJ's error involved what is known as "derivative citizenship." If a parent naturalizes while a child is under 18, the child automatically becomes a citizen, if some other conditions are met. For example, if a father naturalizes, his out-of-wedlock children must be "legitimated" to derive citizenship.
This recent DOJ decision overturned an immigration judge's order to remove (i.e., deport) Oshane Shaneil Cross, a twenty-six-year-old man who was born out of wedlock in Jamaica to parents who were not American citizens at the time. Cross had been arrested for burglary in Connecticut and argued that he became a US citizen when his father naturalized. The immigration judge, however, said that Cross had never been legitimated under Jamaican law because his biological parents never married. In response, the decision clarified that "a person born abroad to unmarried parents can qualify as a legitimated 'child'...if he or she was born in a country or State that has eliminated all legal distinctions between children based on the marital status of their parents or has a residence or domicile in such a country or State[.]" This was true in Cross's case as Jamaica had passed a law in 1976 that eliminated legal distinctions between children born to married and unmarried parents.
What about those already deported? Murray-Tjan asks. "Will the DOJ communicate its error to affected individuals? How? When?...Will the government make any effort to identify them and bring them home?"