Donald Trump–who famously declared his intention to ban Muslims from coming to the United States, and who called Mexican migrants “rapists“– is represented in his presidential campaign by a law firm whose pro bono clients include Muslims and Mexicans, as well as many other immigrants and asylum seekers.
To be sure, all 2,400+ attorneys at Jones Day do not support Mr. Trump, and many have been quite vocal (at least anonymously) about their opposition to the candidate and their firm’s representation of him. It also seems that the lead attorney for the Trump campaign, Donald “Don” McGahn II, has been under some pressure to separate himself from the firm. However, at least for now, Jones Day seems to be all in for the Republican nominee.
Given it’s support for the candidate, perhaps it’s a bit ironic that Jones Day has spent considerable money and pro bono time representing the very people that Mr. Trump seeks to ban from our country. Indeed, Jones Day has been recognized for its service by a number of leading immigrant-advocacy groups, including Human Rights First, the National Immigrant Justice Center, Tahirih Justice Center, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Asylum Project, Immigration Equality, and the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition. These organizations represent immigrants and asylum seekers throughout the country. Many of their clients are detained in ICE custody. Some are criminals. Others are (gasp!) Muslim. The work of these organizations has helped save thousands of lives, and the support of firms like Jones Day is integral to their efforts.
And it’s not just organizational support. Aside from fundraising, a perusal of the firm’s recent pro bono successes reveals that Jones Day attorneys have directly represented Muslim, Mexican, and Central American asylum seekers, among many others. The firm has also represented criminal aliens in their quest to remain in the United States.
For example, in March 2016, three attorneys from the Jones Day Chicago office won a victory in the Ninth Circuit for a Salvadoran man convicted of perjury. As a result of this success, the man has an opportunity to present his case for relief to the Immigration Judge, and he now has a chance to stay in the United States with his wife and son. The firm also successfully represented a gay man from Jamaica who received relief under the Torture Convention (most likely, he was ineligible for asylum due to a criminal conviction), an Afghan man convicted of assault against a police officer, and a Mexican citizen who was charged with procuring his admission to the U.S. by fraud.
In addition to its criminal-immigration work, the firm has obtained asylum for a Muslim refugee from Somalia, a Muslim refugee from Iraq, and many other clients from majority-Muslim countries, including a woman from Mali, a family from Kyrgyzstan, a man from Turkey, a family from Iran, a woman and her son from Iraq, and a man from Yemen (the firm’s website does not specify whether these clients are Muslim, but it seems likely that many are).
In fact, the firm has an entire webpage devoted to its pro bono asylum and immigration activities. Jones Day is rightly proud of this work–the firm has assisted scores of asylum seekers and immigrants. It has won many cases and has represented aliens in precedent-setting litigation before the federal appellate courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. The firm is also rightly proud of its support for various non-profits, which help thousands of foreign nationals and their families. But how do these effort squares with the firm’s representation of Mr. Trump, whose central message is anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant?
It seems pretty clear that there is no ethical conflict in terms of the Rules of Professional Responsibility that lawyers must follow, and I have no doubt that the firm can competently represent both Mr. Trump and its pro bono clients. However, it does seem to me that representing the Republican nominee creates a real moral conflict for Jones Day.
From my observation, big-firm attorney who represent asylum seekers and immigrants pour their hearts and soles into the cases. They often become friendly with their clients and they are heavily invested in the case outcomes. How would it feel to devote yourself to such a case, only to have your firm’s most high-profile client denigrate your efforts?
I am not a Jones Day attorney. I am not even a big-firm attorney. Never have been; probably never will be. But it seems to me that the character of a firm is important. That character is defined by the work the firm does–the paid work, and perhaps even more so, the pro bono work, which represents the firm’s core values. Mr. Trump’s campaign is diametrically opposed to the values that underpin much of Jones Day’s pro bono work, and I do not see how these two paths can be morally reconciled. I also do not see how the firm can maintain its integrity by helping needy immigrants at the same time it is working to elect a president who is a bigot and a xenophobe.
Abraham Lincoln once observed that a house divided against itself cannot stand. I wonder: Can a law firm?
Hello Jason, some quick question.
I have applied for asylum which is still pending with a J1 Visa bearing the two year residency requirement. I also understand that I needed to have applied for a waiver of the two year rule, but I did not see it necessary since I have applied for asylum. So while waiting for asylum decision, can I apply for an R1 status as a religious worker? I am already out of my J1 Status although I have applied for asylum.
Thanks
Asylum will erase the 2-year home residency requirement. But if your J-1 has expired, I believe the only way you can get an R visa is to leave the US and return with the visa, which could be a problem. You probably should hire a lawyer to help you if you pursue this option. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason.. thanks for sharing information. Information is power and you are empowering people who are in a great need of help and guidance at this time. Let me ask kindly if I can I apply for eb1-a extra ordinary visa after applying for asylum or apply for eb1-a then for asylum…
Thank you very much
If you are still “in status”, you can apply for a green card through EB-1 (or any other path to a green card) and probably get the card without leaving the US. If your period of lawful stay has expired, you probably will have to leave the US to get your green card and this can be a problem. You should probably consult with a lawyer about the specifics of your case before you file the application. Take care, Jason
Mr Dzubow please tell me if know after how long they gonna call reschedule my interview if my translator didn’t show up???? Thank u so much!!!!
At least in my local office, they usually reschedule in a matter of weeks, but I suppose it depends on their workload and availability. Take care, Jason
Hi jason
Thanks again and again for your help
I Sent to renew the work permit since March, has sent me the dates of interview and will be in this month, do you think it will delay sending a work permit so that they can see the outcome of the interview?Is it possible immigration officer refuse you asylum just because he believes what he says Trump?What are the reasons for rejecting the asylum?What is the rate of rejection of asylum in office SF?
San Francisco has the highest grant rate of any asylum office (I wrote about this a few months ago). The work permit application is independent of the asylum case, and so I doubt one will affect the other for your case. Also, whatever Mr. Trump says is not relevant to your case – at least not unless he becomes president. Good luck with the interview, Jason
Hi Jason,
I sent a message to the email address on your blog page JDzubow@DzuboLaw.com pls let me if its the right email address cos i’ve not gotten a reply from you yet.Thanks
I believe I replied to your email. If not, please let me know. Take care, Jason
hello Jason
After long time recently I got a letter for interview, here i have a question when I go to for interview do i need lawyer? I have not hired lawyer.
Thank You
The most important tasks for the lawyer are to prepare your case and practice with you before the interview (to go over any problematic parts of the case and to help you think about how to respond). At the interview itself, the lawyer does not do much. Maybe it is worthwhile to talk to a lawyer before the interview to go over your case. Good luck, Jason
Thank you jason
Which year and month did you apply for asylum and with which office.
Hi Jason,
I have a query which is slightly out of this topic.
My asylum and TPS are pending, and I have work permit through pending asylum.
Now an institution wants to hire me and it can sponsor H1 and I have an option to choose to work either on current EAD or H1.
How likely is the approval of H1 in this case? What will happen to my TPS and asylum application?
I am willing to take H1 so that I can bring my wife as dependent.
THX
Nothing will happen, you can get your H1b visa without impacting your Asylum and TPS status, but in order to be qualified for H1B you should be in valid non-immigration status at the time you apply for H1B which is April 1st from each year.
You can have TPS, asylum, and an H1b visa all at the same time. As for the H1b question, it is not something I know about. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason
I hope you are having a good weekend please correct me if I am wrong, If I want to change my address with the immigration court I have to fill out the EOIR-33 form and mail it to the court address at the back of the form and make a copy of this form and put it in envelope and mail it or delivered (which one you recommend?) to DHS/ICE office.
And is there is any way that I could get proof (letter or anything) from DHS/ICE office that they got my change of address form?
Many thanks
You can take the form in-person and deliver it to DHS and the court; if you bring an extra copy, they will stamp it, which is proof you filed it. If you do it by mail, maybe you can include an extra copy + a stamped, return envelope and they can stamp it and mail it back to you. I do not know whether they will do this, but you can try. We just mail the form using registered mail and we keep a copy of the mailing receipt. Take care, Jason
Thank you Jason
My experience as an asylum officer has always been that when big firms take on pro bono asylum cases it is usually to give first and second year associates some quick court room experience. Sometimes partners actually handle some cases, but mostly it is handled by new associates.
Not knocking it – sometimes asylum applicants get some pretty decent representation for free and some associates throw the full weight of their firm’s resources behind their case and produce some pretty impressive COI research, but just as often the representation is only slightly better than no representation at all.
Nevertheless, I do think the firms put a fair bit of offenses on their pro bono work, and it is important to them. I doubt Jones Day will dump Trump because of its pro bono interests, though it might if his representation hurts the firm’s business interests in Latin America or the Middle East. We will see. Take care, Jason
You say you’re sure it’s ethical, so I guess you’ve thought it out. But I don’t immediately see it: why isn’t this a conflict of interests for Jones Day? How can you zealously and unreservedly represent Trump’s presidential campaign when your success may directly prevent your Muslim asylum client from seeing his overseas family ever again?
I could be wrong – Lord knows I am not an expert in Legal Ethics. But I do not see a direct conflict between representing his campaign, which, if elected, may engage in conduct that will hurt certain immigrant clients, and representing those immigrant clients. The campaign may also want to tighten trade restrictions, for example, and the firm represents businesses that want to loosen those restrictions. It’s a big firm, and unless the conflict is more direct, I don’t see that the Rules of Professional Conduct are being violated. If we can show otherwise, I am happy to file the bar complaint, though. Take care, Jason
Jason, with all due respect, you have misrepresented Trump’s positions. He called for a TEMPORARY halt to U.S. entry by Muslims until we could get a handle on “what the hell is going on” and be sure people are being properly vetted. National security is the first responsibility of ANY government. Also, you imply that he called all Mexican migrants “rapists”. No, he referred to the fact that among illegal aliens entering from Mexico are quite a number of violent felons and, yes, RAPISTS. If you want to see what happens when overwhelming numbers of migrants are allowed to enter a country with no vetting, then take a look at some of the new rape capitals of the world in Europe. No one wants that here. I have faithfully represented refugees for over 14 years of all races, creeds and faiths. Trump’s stand against what illegal immigration is doing to the U.S. is falsely and repeatedly equated with being “anti-immigrant”, which is a damnable lie. I look at my clients who have entered legally and timely filed asylum while their families remain in danger back in Crapistan, and I have to tell them they must wait years for an asylum interview because thousands of border-crashing largely economic migrants who claim to be under 21 must be put in front of my law abiding clients waiting in line. The illegal alien situation that has been allowed to develop and indeed deliberately exascerbated by this administration is a slap in the face to my decent, desperate and in most cases law-abiding clients.(A Syrian Muslim man who contacted me days from removal two years ago will today greet at the airport the bride he left behind 3 years ago and meet the 2.5 year old son he has never seen; they were stuck in a war zone while the asylum people here focused on illegal aliens seeking benefits at the southern border.) I see absolutely ZERO inconsistency between representing the Trump campaign and serving people working their way through the U.S. immigration system, who deserve respect because they have shown respect.
Certainly we disagree on this – I see Trump’s repeated statements against Muslims, as if somehow we have thrown open the door to any old terrorist who feels like visiting – to be utterly false and designed to evoke fear (and gain support). I do think his statement on Mexicans is more arguable, but it seems to me clearly intended to stoke anti-immigrant fears. Where we do not disagree is on the problem created by thousands of migrants arriving here and blocking more traditional asylum seekers from obtaining status (and for your client to wait 3 years away from his family is pretty horrible). I do represent a limited number of Central American asylum seekers. They do have a real fear of return due to violence, but whether they meet the nexus requirement is another story. My opinion on that is that we (President/Congress) should decide whether we want to offer protection to such people rather than leave things as they are, which ain’t working. Take care, Jason
So what do you say to people who made the attempt to come legally and where denied visas? As an immigration attorney you have to know how difficult getting a visa is for someone from Latin America. What makes your clients seperation from family any more tragic than the thousands of people who haven’t seen their families in a decade and have no idea when, if ever, they will. I just don’t see how someone who managed to get here legally is any more, or less, important than someone who’s only option was to come illegally. If we actually gave Latin Americans a spitting chance at coming legally the majority would do just that.
I have clients who come here illegally, and I know they would all come legally if they could. Their situations are often sympathetic and even tragic (and may from Central America are forced to flee places where the US intervened to make their country more dangerous). Nevertheless, the US has a right and a duty to control its border. This is the difficult balancing act that is immigration in general, and asylum/refugee in particular.
Plz guide me in easyily;
i applied for political asylum in New York in January 2015.Now New york office is conducted interviews of applicatant who applies in August/Sept 2014.it means that hopefully my turn for interview will come after 4 months in September 2016.
But i have a offer for job in Washington dc.if i join job in dc and move to dc transfer my case to arlingtin ofc then ;
1.My interview will be conducted on same schedule as per New York?
2.or my interview will conduct as per seniority of applicants in Dc.
Plz guide me in easy language.Thanks.
If you move to DC, and move your case, your application will follow the schedule for the Arlington, Virginia asylum office. Maybe you can find a way to keep your permanent address in NY, but start the job in DC. You might want to talk to a lawyer about that. The danger would be that the asylum office might think you are lying about your address, which could impact your case. Also, while the schedule gives some idea of when your interview will be, I think it is not all that predictive, especially for cases a few months in the future. Depending on many factors, you may get an interview soon, or you may not. Take care, Jason
Maybe they do it for tax brakes? I have never met a republican who was about helping others. There is always something in it for him.
Asylum in some ways is quite conservative. The Refugee Convention was largely crafted so that people fleeing the Soviets could get asylum, but people fleeing the West could not, and values like religious liberty and political freedom are important in the founding documents. While I think the Republican Party has lost its way, many Republicans support asylum in these types of “classic” cases, as it is an expression of American values. Take care, Jason