Gabriella Jassir: The DLG-Proust-Actors Studio Questionnaire

When Gabriella was seven years old, her family moved from Barranquilla, Colombia, to Tampa, Florida. This experience sparked her first interest in learning about immigration law. As a junior in high school, she attended her naturalization ceremony along with her father and sister at the Tampa Convention Center. “It was really exciting because everyone was so happy,” she says. “The ceremony itself was cool. There was probably around 200 to 300 people, but they called out all the different countries that had people nationalizing: Colombia, Brazil, and many more. It was interesting seeing how diverse everyone was.” 

Read more

ProPublica: “Extreme Digital Vetting of Visitors to the U.S. Moves Forward Under a New Name”

At a tech industry conference hosted by the Government Technology & Services Coalition last month, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) invited software providers to begin the process of creating algorithms that would monitor the social media accounts of visa holders deemed to be a high risk in order to assess potential threats to the US. The agency announced that they would need tools equipped with “risk-based matrices” that would continue social media surveillance throughout these visa holders’ stay in the US so that ICE may predict any threats. These requests are the first clear plans showing ICE’s intent to augment tougher visa vetting with the monitoring of social media through a program now named “Visa Lifecycle Vetting.” 

Read more

Diplomats and Their Special Privileges

Over 100,000 representatives of foreign governments, including their dependents, are in the United States, and many of these foreign representatives are entitled to some degree of diplomatic immunity and certain privileges. We have written about a variety of immigrant and nonimmigrant visa types for foreign nationals, but diplomats are, in a word, special. We thought we’d take a closer look at visa types for diplomats as well as their privileges while in the US and, importantly, whether they are really responsible for those unpaid parking tickets!

Read more

Business 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 more

Vox: “Hundreds of immigrants will get to resubmit DACA renewals originally rejected as ‘late’”

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced last week that they will allow DACA recipients who missed the October 5 deadline either because of delays with the US Postal Service or the failure of a courier to pick up the applications from a US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) mailbox, to reapply for their extensions. This is crucial for these applicants since the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program will be ending on March 5, 2018, and the deadline to apply for one last two-year extension of DACA protections was October 5, 2017. The government says that approximately 4,000 individuals failed to meet the October 5 deadline to renew their DACA protections, and initially chose to reject many of these applications that were late due to no fault of the sender. USCIS reversed their decision not to accept the late DACA applications after they “identified USPS mail service delays that affected a number of DACA renewal requests” as well as “discovered certain cases in which the DACA requests were received at the designated filing location (e.g., at the applicable P.O. Box) by the filing deadline, but were rejected.”

Read more