In a recent editorial, the Washington Post opined that Congress’s failure to pass immigration reform has led to the ongoing crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border. But even without Congress, the Biden Administration can use its regulatory power to better define the term “refugee” and thus better control who is eligible to enter the United States under our asylum law.
To qualify for asylum and gain entry into the United States at the border, noncitizens must demonstrate that they have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or particular social group. This “nexus” (connection) between the feared harm and a protected category is key to understanding the legal concept of asylum. Applicants who cannot demonstrate a nexus are not eligible for protection in the United States. In other words, the purpose of asylum is not to protect people; it is to protect certain people–those who can demonstrate a likelihood of harm based on a protected ground.
One of these protected grounds–particular social group or PSG–is more vague than the others, and over the years, its meaning has evolved (and de-evolved) based on litigation and the whims of various Administrations. On the positive side, many people have gained protection based on their PSG, including LGBT individuals, victims of female genital mutilation, and people facing domestic violence. On the negative side, it has become very difficult in many cases to determine in advance who qualifies for asylum based on a PSG.
The uncertainty surrounding PSGs is problematic because so many migrants at the Southern border rely on a PSG for their asylum claim. According to CBP data, about 63% of all arrivals at the border come from Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. The large majority of these migrants are not fleeing political, religious or ethnic violence. Rather, they face harm related to the failure of government institutions in their countries, which allows criminal gangs, violent domestic partners, and personal disputes to go unchecked. Because they are not “traditional” asylum seekers and do not fall easily within any other protected category, these applicants must rely on creatively-articulated PSGs to obtain protection in the United States. All this uncertainty coupled with the possibility of a successful claim has encouraged potential migrants to try their luck at the border, which has contributed to the record number of people requesting protection in recent months.
To truly address the crisis, we as a nation need to have an honest conversation about who is coming here and why. We should recognize that most migrants are ordinary, good, hard-working people who are fleeing real danger. We also need to consider our own values: Who do we want to protect? Does it matter why a person needs asylum or should we protect everyone who fears harm in their home country? Finally, we need to decide how many people our country should accept. If we could reach some agreement on these matters, Congress could amend the asylum law to reflect our national consensus.
Unfortunately, reaching consensus these days seems nearly impossible and it is unlikely that Congress will act anytime soon. In that case, we are left with an immigration law that is disconnected from our nation’s values and that is easily exploited for political gain by anti-immigrant politicians like President Trump.
In the absence of Congressional action, the Biden Administration should move to create a workable regulatory definition of PSG. This definition should take into consideration our shared values. It must also recognize our limited resources and limited political capital, and should offer protection to those we deem a priority.
Up until now, the Biden Administration has relied on Title 42, a public health measure, to arbitrarily exclude migrants regardless of asylum eligibility. But unless a federal court orders it to remain in place, Title 42 will end later this month, which will greatly increase the number of people requesting asylum at the border. For this reason, the need for a coherent border strategy has become urgent. Through the use of its regulatory power, the Administration can create more certainty at the border, offer protection to people most in need of help, and mitigate the political damage from the ongoing crisis. More precisely defining who qualifies for asylum will go a long way towards achieving these goals.
Hi Everyone in this forum,
Can anybody email me contact information of very experienced and knowledgeable lawyer who can apply NIW (EB national interest waiver) successfully as I am eligible for this category and really appreciated if anybody of you as my friends can help me with this, please send it to rexcolo2019@gmail.com , highly appreciated
Hi Jason. Thank you for your Help.
I have 2 questions.
I got Marry with US citizen in Feb 2022. My Wife filed my Petition for change of Status in month of MARCH 2022. I already had my Asylum case in which is still pending and file asylum case in 2017. Somehow I been accusing from my wife side now cause of Money issues and she threats me many to time to pull out marriage base application.
My question is what if she get divorce dose it effect on my pending asylum case? Which been filed in 2017.
2nd Question is. Can I remarry here with US citizen again and file again my new application through another new marriage after divorce from previous marriage? Can new marriage application can effect on my pending asylum application?
I do not see that the divorce would have any effect on your asylum case. If you marry again and she is a US citizen, she can file for you to get a GC. Once you get the GC, you can inform the asylum office and close the case. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
Thank you as always for bringing succor to many of us.
I am referred to immigration court, and my case coming up in February, 2024. Unfortunately, my EAD Card will expire a year before the court date. How do I renew my work authorization? Will it be renewed by the USCIS or by the court? Please let me know how to go about it, so I am not stranded.
Thank you
The soonest you can file to renew is 180 days before the current card expires. You have to file a form I-765, available at http://www.uscis.gov. As long as you file before the current card expires, the current EAD is automatically extended by 540 days. I did a blog post about that on May 11, 2022. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason, thanks for your blog and help for refugees! I’m about to apply for a asylum. I have no criminal record in Russia but I was detained by police a few times. FIrst it lasted for about 28 hours. Other time I spent a bit more then 2 days in the cell. How do you call my first and second time in this country? Detention, arrest or something else? How long the stay is to considered as detention? Should I answer YES on the question were you ever detained even it was clearly politically motivated? Thank you, Misha
It sounds like you were detained, and so I think you have to answer “yes.” But the form allows you to provide an explanation, and you can also provide an explanation in your affidavit (assuming you submit an affidavit). It is very common for asylum seekers to have been detained, as the whole point of asylum is to protect such people, and so this is normal. Just provide the explanation that the arrest was political and/or illegal and you should be fine. You will have to also discuss this when you apply for an EAD, and so you would provide the explanation in that application as well (this is for later, as you have to wait 150 days after the asylum filing date before you can apply for an EAD). Take care, Jason
How do you submit evidence online? Or submit any pictures/screenshots/documents online?
It is possible to file an affirmative asylum case online if you have a USCIS account. I have not done that yet, as I hate change, but eventually, I will. Aside from that, I know of no way to submit evidence online. We mail a hard copy of the evidence to the asylum office before the interview. Sometimes, we send them a copy of the evidence by email, but in most cases, they will not accept a large filing by email. If you are talking about a court case, some cases are now online and you can submit evidence through the EOIR online portal (but as far as I know, only lawyers with an account can do that). Take care, Jason
Hi Jason and All,
I applied for I-485 based on the asylee’s status and paid all the fees. Can I renew my EAD or travel document for free due to a pending I-485 case, or have to submit additional fees?
Also, does anyone have experience traveling to Germany or Turkey with RTD? I would appreciate your input.
Thank you.
Hi Jason and All,
I applied for I-485 based on the asylee’s status and paid all the fees. Can I renew my EAD or travel document for free due to a pending I-485 case, or have to submit additional fees?
Also, does anyone have experience traveling to Germany or Turkey with RTD? I would appreciate your input.
Thank you.
In the past, you could get a free EAD once you paid the I-485 fee, but that does not seem to work any more. For our clients, we have them pay the fee. You can also do a fee waiver, using form I-912, available at http://www.uscis.gov, if you are eligible. In terms of the travel, I do not know, but maybe you can check with their embassies or the embassy websites, which sometimes have info about RTDs. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason
I am asylum applicant who’s case was referred to the immigration court in Virginia, the assigned Judge has more than 93% denial rate !! My attorney gave me option to do the “prosecutorial discretion” request .
I’m afraid that I lose my asylum “7% chance” .
IS IT POSSIBLE THAT I STILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET ASYLUM IF I DID THE PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION REQUEST?
Please advise, thank you
If you take PD, you will not have an opportunity to do the asylum case. There are two types of PD – one keeps the case open, but removes it from the schedule. If you get this, you can keep your EAD. The other type of PD terminates the case and leaves you with no case. If that happens, you will not be able to renew the EAD, and it will become invalid in 60 days (I think). If the case is terminated, you could file for asylum with the Asylum Office and eventually get a new EAD and an opportunity to present your case to the asylum officer. Before you accept PD, you need to know what you are getting, but I think these days, DHS will only agree to termination (meaning you lose the EAD). I would be careful about relying on the data (93% denial), as that is the overall denial rate. If you have a strong case, you would still have a chance to win (though not a great chance), and so you have to evaluate the specifics of your case and not just look at the general denial rate. Another option is to move to a new state, and then your case will (probably) transfer to a new court. While you may get another judge with a high denial rate, you could also have better luck. All these things should be discussed with your lawyer so you can make the best decision for you. Take care, Jason
Thanks a lot Jason, this is very helpful
I was also advised by my attorney to apply for PD and she said my case will be suspended from court and go back with USCIS. And with PD approved I won’t be deported and can work with EAD. I was not told that there are chances of denial of EAD also. If I appear for MCH and Individual hearing with IJ, can I apply for PD? And if I want to take my decision for reconsideration with BIA can I apply for PD after BIA denies my case? Thanks
Most people who get PD will lose their EAD, so you need to be careful about that and know exactly what you will be getting. If you lose your case and appeal to the BIA, maybe you can still get PD, but I think DHS (the prosecutor) will be less likely to agree to PD under those circumstances (since you have already been ordered deported by a judge). My sense is that if you want PD, you ask for it before the final hearing before the immigration judge. Also, for my clients, with a few exceptions, we only want PD if they have an alternative form of relief – usually marriage to a US citizen. If your case is terminated based on PD, you can also file a new asylum case with the asylum office – you must do that quickly to avoid the one-year bar (I wrote about the one year bar on January 18, 2018 – that may help, but ask a lawyer about the specifics for your case). In sum, make sure you know what you are getting when you accept PD, including whether you will be able to renew the EAD and whether you have other relief available if your case is dismissed. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
My wife and I came to the US as a F1 student visa in 2017, while I was at school, my wife(she was on F2 status) applied for Asylum in the united states, and since then we have been waiting for interview and now we are turning to 5 year of waiting. During the last few years I tried to maintain my legal immigration status, but unfortunately , due to the pandemic I lost my job in 2021 and my OPT and F1 status terminated after 150 days. Now I am selected DV lottery for 2023. My question is there any chance to adjust my status now! I thought “technical violation resulting from inaction of USCIS” might be applicable to our case since we were waiting for like 4 years for our interview.
I wrote about the DV lotter on October 5, 2015, so maybe that would be of interest. I think the “technical violation applies only to people getting a GC based on employment, and I think you would need to leave the US to get a GC based on the lottery. I may be wrong or maybe there is some way to get the GC here, so talk to a lawyer about the specifics. If you decide to go overseas to get the GC, have the lawyer write down step-by-step how you will get the GC, so you know what to expect. Also, I would try to get Advance Parole, which is permission to leave and re-enter the US, so that you will be able to return here if you go overseas to get the GC based on the lottery and something goes wrong. I wrote about AP on September 11, 2017. Take care, Jason
Hi All. Does anyone receive interview invitation or had interview in San Francisco field office recently? Just wanted to know what’s their current process. I have been waiting for my interview like 5+ years, feeling exhausted and depressed at the moment. Or any other offices recently went for interview? Thanks.
I had a new case get scheduled for an interview (under the LIFO system – last in, first out), but then they canceled it, so we are back to waiting. For older cases, your best bet for an interview is to try to expedite – I wrote about that on March 30, 2017. Take care, Jason
What’s the reason for the cancellation ? It seems like they are like immigration court now …
They normally do not give a reason, but when they cancel an interview, it is supposedly the first priority to get a new date, so hopefully, the delay will not be long. Take care, Jason
Been waiting for 5 years now . Im going to hire an attorney and sue them , just want to know what % they would dismiss it , Doj or whoever in charge on the grounds that 5 year is normal ( its f**ing not ) . Second, should I first move my case to a location with the least case work ? So if they interview me , then I dont have to wait for years for this garbage of an agency to make the decision .
I do not do mandamus cases, but my impression is that mostly, if you file a mandamus, they will give you an interview. In some cases, they may fight the mandamus, but usually not. If you move, you may want to try to expedite again in the “normal” way (I wrote about that on March 30, 2017 and March 23, 2022) before you try a mandamus. Some offices (New Orleans and to a lesser extent, San Francisco) seem pretty good about expediting, at least in my experience. Take care, Jason
Los Angeles didn’t accept my expedite request after 4 Times back in 2019 . I got a note from my psychologist and my physician regarding my ailment . I asked my congressman to intervene and they still sent a letter saying they are unable due to lack of resources .
This is a very common result. You can always try again if you have new evidence (or even if you do not have new evidence). You can also try a mandamus lawsuit if you want. Take care, Jason
Jason,
I have just noticed that my lawyer has sent the scanned copy of the original notice (RFE) together with other evidences. But the notice explains, the original notice must be submitted with requested evidence. Does it have negative impact? Or Should we send again the original ?
Thanks
I send these by mail, but if your lawyer sent it through the USCIS website, that should work too. If you are not sure, ask the lawyer about that, but as long as USCIS accepted the response, you should be ok. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
I had my interview at San Francisco Asylum office 3 months ago. I sent inquiry to the office 1 month ago but no response. I still have not gotten my interview result.
I will be moving to Texas for school for one year but will still be maintaining my California address. I will be back and forth Texas and California. Please will that effect my interview result in any way and how should I feel the change of address form reflecting the two address?
Thank you
Hi, may I ask when you filed your case?
I’m also waiting for an interview from the SF office, and curious about which interviews they are scheduling now (since they’ve been pretty strict during covid, and moved extremely slowly with all interviews)
Also, I really hope you don’t need to wait for the decision too long, and it will be positive for you 🙂
Thanks
If you keep your permanent address in CA, and you can get mail there, you do not need to change your address. If you do change your address, SF should still make the decision and send it to you. However, if they need a second interview, that would normally take place in TX. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
My Asylum case was filed in Dec 2015 , It has been 6 years and till date there is no response or any indication of interview or anything . It seems like a total stop a blackout.
I do not know what I can do that will help me in getting an interview or what other parallel options I can explore.
I even don’t know if short list will work or not.
What will you suggest me at this point.
Thanks
Hi Imran, we are in the same boat, we have been waiting since 2016, you can try to expedite your case if you have a good reason or you can file a write of mandamus which you need to have a lawyer for that and for the short list you need to check if this option is available in the office that you filed your case, good luck.
I’m in the same boat and still have been waiting since June 2015 in Los Angeles.Two weeks ago,I went to the asylum office and gave them my expedite request with evidence.My attorney was at court and wasn’t with me.She asked me about my attorney that he has to fill out a asylum inquiry form and email it too. I talked to my attorney before going there but he wasn’t agree with expedition. He believes the only way to get an interview is writ of mandamus nowadays but it is costly(I don’t know the fee)and I will be interviewed in 2 months. I’m really worried about filling a lawsuit against USCIS because of retaliation that may affect my asylum interview decision.I see many people file a mandamus because of long delay in Los Angeles.
I read Jason’s book and wanna follow it .First, I tried to expedite my case 2 times this year and if it doesn’t work, I will file a lawsuit .I generally hate lawsuit and hope to be interviewed soon through expedition.
I hope every asylum seeker hears good news from USCIS this year and share the happiness with us.
I did posts about expediting on March 30, 2017 and March 23, 2022 – maybe take a look at those. Unfortunately, things now are very slow and it is difficult to get them to expedite a case. We have done it recently, and so I know it is not impossible; it is just usually unsuccessful. Take care, Jason
I did posts about expediting on March 30, 2017 and March 23, 2022 – maybe take a look at those. Unfortunately, things now are very slow and it is difficult to get them to expedite a case. We have done it recently, and so I know it is not impossible; it is just usually unsuccessful. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
Me and my husband have applied for GC 17 months ago, but the case have stopped at biometrics approval about 16 months ago. What can we do to expedite the case? And, is it normal that we’re waiting this long?
Thank you,
Hi,
I have the same case,….expedited, unfortunately denied!!!! USCIS said “ your case is pending within processing time!!!! I recently checked USCIS website and apparently the new processing time is 2.5 yrs.
So, relax, and keep praying 😣😣😣
If the GC is based on asylum, this is normal – cases are taking 2 to 2.5 years for most people. I did a post about expediting with USCIS on January 29, 2020 – maybe that would be of interest. Take care, Jason
So according to the recent report 234,088 people were encountered at the southern border only in the month of April 22, which is the highest I guess ever.
I just filled late ead renewal reached to texas lock box on tuesday. I havent i 797C email and official Receipt Notice (Form I-797) can any one tell me time frame? and, EAD expired May 10 and i 765 filled May 15 that has effect for not sending received email for three days.
Thank you
If you filed after the old card expired, you are technically not eligible for the 540-day automatic extension, but I am not sure USCIS or anyone else pays attention to that rule, and I bet the receipt will give you the extension. Hopefully. Take care, Jason
That would be to harsh for couple of days delay hopefully not…can you tell me when can i get response email from USCIS and the letter.
I am referring to the receipt for the new EAD. That should mention about the automatic extension. Take care, Jason
Hey guys,
I’m based in Boston and I fell my asylum claim on 2015 do you happen to know any lawyer or law firm that accept payments for immigration legal service instead of paying 4 or 5k one time ?
Thanks I’m advance
Many lawyers (including me) do payment plans, so if you look around, you should find one. I also did a post about finding a free lawyer on September 23, 2016. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason, I applied for GC through my Asylum approved in Early 2021. At that time my lawyer not sent medical. Last month I received RFE for medical. I sent medical and yesterday I received an update that your medical is received and again we start working on you case. My question is how long it takes to make decision on my application. I want to know your past experience please.
For most of my cases, the person received the GC a few weeks or maybe a couple months after sending in the medical exam. Take care, Jason
Jason, thank you for writing this article. I disagree with most of what you argued, though. But, I am going to list a few of the points that jumped out at me.
First, let’s be clear- changing the definition of the word “refugee” will not stop the influx of migrants at the border. However, broadening the definition of refugee allows for some bad people to abuse the asylum system. Take for example the people fleeing war in Ukraine, some parts of Africa, and Syria. Most of the people fleeing these countries don’t know- nor care- about the definition of refugee. The belief that a definition or enumeration (irrespective of how narrowly defined or enumerated) of some very abstruse theories, words, or terms can deter people from fleeing harm is a mistake in reasoning.
Second- the demagogues in the Republican party would simply pivot towards/adopt other political appeals or red meats- Black and brown people legally immigrating to the US, LGBTQ+ people, pro-choice supporters, Black Lives Matter, Jews, etc.- if the southern border becomes physically impossible to cross and all the asylum seekers at the border go away. Simply denying asylum seekers their legal right to seek asylum at the border- or at least present their case to an immigration officer/judge- does not correct the fact that America has had a history of racism and xenophobia against immigrants of color. It would also not reduce the number of people becoming victims of professional fearmongers, propagandists and disinformation spreaders. Implementing (or invoking) Title 42- a very rarely used section of the US code- was, and continues to be, a sham disguised as controlling the spread of COVID-19. When did Republicans, including their constituencies, become concerned about COVID-19 and its ability to cause widespread harm? You mean to tell me that these anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers (many of them are in Congress)- of course not all of them are against masks or vaccines; however, many of them don’t even think that COVID is real- are concerned about the spread COVID-19? Furthermore, implementing Title 42, or not lifting it, arguably- or more likely than not- runs afoul of local and international asylum laws. Perhaps what we should be asking Americans is if they really want to continue as a member of the Convention.
You argued that the US should determine how many people it should accept. This, to me, harkens back to the time when “illegal” European immigrants, especially white men, faced few, if any, repercussions, and the “others”- especially people of Asian and African descents- were banned outright, denied citizenship, or classified as less than human. The time when most “legal” immigrants came only from Europe and granted citizenship status. Where would the majority of the people come from if there were immigration quotas set? How would they look? Would they have the wherewithal- or be more educated- to navigate America’s confusing and unfair immigration system? In any event, immigration and asylum quotas sound archaic to me.
You also argued that America has very limited resources and political capital and therefore, I am presuming, you are arguing that America is incapable of handling the 20k or so immigrants at the border trying to seek asylum/the backlogs. Please tell me my presumption is wrong.
To me, if the majority of the people at the US-Mexico border were white, they would have been welcomed with opened arms by most Americans. I am not going to make any bones about this.
I think Jamie has a good point. USCIS should tell potential immigrants at the border that the USA is a racist country and people are making huge mistakes coming here. They will suffer injustice, police brutality, and poverty. Because obviously they don’t know about it and keep pouring in and bringing their families into this racist nightmare.
For your first point, I do not think migrants will be deterred because the definition of “refugee” is changed. I think that once the change is implemented and people are turned away at the border, this will become known and will eventually start to deter people. But what is more important is that we have a system that distinguishes between those we do and do not want to assist, and that we do not simply reject people in an arbitrary way (under Title 42, for example). Second, I think it is nearly certain that Republicans will continue to demagogue people and lie. However, I think there is a strong constituency that wants the border closed (I did a post about this on March 24, 2021 citing some polling), and if some of those people can be peeled away from the Republic side, it may help Democrats, particularly since many races seem to be decided by razor thin margins. Third, I do not necessarily think we should limit the number of people allowed to seek protection here, but I think we should make a decision about this – there are many ways to limit or expand the numbers. For example, we could eliminate the nexus, which would offer protection to more people. Or we could tighten the definition of PSG, which would reduce the number of people eligible for protection. But what we have now is a system that has greatly evolved from its origins and which was not created by consensus. In the article above, the un-stated assumption is that if we could know the consensus, it would be to reduce the number of people eligible under the PSG category, and so maybe the Biden Administration should modify the PSG definition to reflect that change. The hope being that reducing the number of people entering at the border will help Democrats increase their appeal with voters who care about border security, but who do not buy into other Republican positions. Fourth, I think our country can absorb and integrate many more migrants, but I think we do not have the political will to do that, and this has been exploited by anti-immigrant politicians. Finally, I do think there would be less resistance to large numbers of migrants if they were white and Christian (Syrians are white, but we have not been too keen to welcome them), but I think it is dangerous to assume that people who want reduced migration at the border are racist. Some are, but some are not, and we cannot ignore the legitimate concerns of people about the border crisis. The point I have been arguing for years is that we need a conversation about asylum and we need a new consensus about who we want to admit. If there were more public support for asylum, we could likely protect many people, have a more functioning system, and avoid some of the political exploitation of refugees, which benefits Republicans. Take care, Jason
Hey Jason,
Thank you for investing your invaluable knowledge in helping humanity. You are truly exceptional.
I am a foreign attorney who fled my country due to persecution. Filed for asylum in 2018 and was recently referred to IJ in Atlanta. Sadly, my master hearing date is February 2024. The USCIS agreed in their report that I was persecuted as claimed, but added that I could also relocate to any part of my country as the treat wasn’t all over. Unfortunately, their conclusion was wrong because my persecutors employed a cult group which is ubiquitous in the country. In fact they have their presence in all the institutions of higher learning in the country, and can attack me irrespective of my location in the country. Besides, as a lawyer, it is difficult to go underground throughout your life. Therefore my questions are:
1. Do you see any possibility of getting justice in Atlanta Immigration Court in view of the fact that the court’s review shows that it hardly grants asylum?
2. What relevant evidences do you think are needed to prove my point that this killer-group is on nook and cronies of the country?
3. Should I call my nationals as witness in the case to prove my point of that I can’t be safe anywhere I’m my country?
4. Will the court be swayed by the fact that my persecution began when I instituted a case against the criminal activities of my persecutors?
5. And finally, will you advise that I advance my case?
1 – You should check “TRAC Immigration” to see whether you can find data for your specific judge, but given the slow time frame, you may have a new judge for trial. Atlanta has traditionally been the worst place for asylum cases in court, and it is one of the few places where I recommend people move away if they can. That is a difficult decision for people, but given the very low grant rates, it may be something to consider. 2 – Aside from country condition info on the internet, you can look for an expert witness who knows about the group. Also, remember that internal relocation must be “reasonable” and so you are not required to live in a cave somewhere – you have to be able to live your life. Of course, different judges have different ideas about what is reasonable. 3 – Sure, or if you have a US citizen expert – a journalist, diplomat, professor, etc., that may be even better. 4 – Maybe, and it is evidence that should be presented. 5 – It is not easy to do that, and if you think you may find an alternative to asylum (for example, marriage to a US citizen), I would take that path instead, especially in Atlanta. Or if you think you may be moving in a year or two, I would move and switch courts rather than advance the case. But it really depends on your needs, and again, advancing a case is not easy. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason
I hope you are doing well
My husband had reinterview yesterday after 6 months from first interview
He filled G325A form for first time and he gave them and for second time they said it was wrong form and you have to fill G325C
And when we complete your process we send you an email and send us your passport with this form for getting visa
I have a question my husband gave them his CV and date of start job is different with form
Because we are using different calendar and for changing to American calendar sometimes happened wrong
What do you think ? He should write like CV or G325A form?
Is there a problem if the dates are different?
I am not sure what you are referring to, but if he has given the US government two different dates for the same event, he should provide an explanation and correct any errors. If the dates are using different calendar systems, he can explain that. Take care, Jason
Thank you for responding
Yes two date for one event ( job start date)
Good piece.
But I want to just clarify…do you support or not support the elimination of title 42 ? or it’s more complicated ?
I support the end of Title 42, but we need something in its place, such as a rational immigration law that distinguishes between people we want to allow in, and people we want to exclude. At this point, my biggest concern is the political effect of the border crisis, which anti-immigration candidates can use to their advantage. Since these are often the same candidates who deny the validity of the 2020 election, think climate change is false, want to roll back reproductive and LGBT rights, and etc., the implications for giving them this advantage are very damaging for our country in more areas than just immigration. Take care, Jason
That’s interesting, Jason. You are not concerned about the problem itself and the government’s inability to solve it. You are concerned that the other side can use it to their advantage and get the power to try their solution. I assume there would be the same logic regarding inflation, high gas prices, crime, world conflicts? Do whatever is needed but don’t let them get the power?
I am very concerned about the problem itself, as I deal with the implications every day at my job, and I see how people are harmed. I am also concerned that our country has failed to update the immigration laws for decades and that this has resulted in a political crisis, as well as a humanitarian crisis. In other words, I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time. Take care, Jason
FIRST lol
Any thoughts on this precedent ?
Patel_v._Garland
Do you think the next step for SCOTUS would be to stop judicial review of asylee fact finding if EOIR and BIA rejects the case?
Federal courts generally will not overturn factual findings of the BIA or an IJ except where there is an obvious error. The Patel case might make this review even more limited. I do not know whether the Supreme Court will try to extend this finding further. Given how infrequently they hear cases related to immigration law, I kind of doubt it. I do think this decision is bad news, since it allows the agency (EOIR) to get away with incorrect factual findings, which encourages sloppiness on their part. Take care, Jason