The Trump Administration has been targeting pro-Palestinian activists under an obscure provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which provides, “An alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable.” See INA § 237(a)(4)(C)(1). Under this section, Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, can basically designate any non-citizen for deportation.
Until recently, this provision was rarely used, but now, the Trump Administration seems intent on labeling hundreds of non-citizens–mostly students who have expressed opposition to Israel’s war in Gaza–as people whose presence in the U.S. has “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences,” thus rendering them deportable.
Here, we’ll discuss INA § 237(a)(4)(C)(1) and some policy implications of its widespread use.
When I first heard about the Administration’s efforts to deport pro-Palestinian students for supposedly supporting the terrorist group Hamas, I thought they would rely on one of the many anti-terrorism provisions of the INA, which are quite broad. Essentially, anyone who “endorses or espouses” terrorism is deportable. The problem with this provision is that it involves a question of fact: The Immigration Judge must review the evidence and determine whether the charged non-citizen was somehow supporting terrorism. It might be difficult for DHS (the prosecutor) to prove this point, given that most reasonable judges would not equate opposing the war or supporting Palestinian rights with support for Hamas.
The evil genius of relying on the Secretary of State’s determination is that it cannot be reviewed by an Immigration Judge. If Mr. Rubio finds that a particular non-citizen’s presence in the U.S. has “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences,” that person is deportable. There is no fact finding for a judge to do, and the Secretary’s determination is essentially checkmate in Immigration Court (though the person could still apply for protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture).
While that may be end of the road in court, it’s not quite the end. That’s because there is a Constitutional question here: Whether INA § 237(a)(4)(C)(1) is so vague as to be unconstitutional. What does this mean?
Basically, where a law is so unclear that we cannot know what it means, and thus cannot avoid violating the law, that law may be invalid under the Constitution. In our case, INA § 237(a)(4)(C)(1) means whatever the Secretary of State says it means. So if Mr. Rubio declares that non-citizens who believe in man-made climate change cause “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences,” then non-citizens who believe in man-made climate change are deportable. If a new Administration ever takes office and concludes that non-citizens who do not believe in man-made climate change cause “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences,” then these non-citizens would be deportable. In this example, non-citizens really can’t know what to do to avoid deportation, other than to purge their minds of any thoughts related to climate change. But even then, what if another Administration concludes that any non-citizen who refuses to think about climate change is causing “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences”? In short, because it is impossible to know in advance what will trigger deportation under this law, it is arguably void for vagueness.
Given the number of cases where INA § 237(a)(4)(C)(1) is being employed, we can expect the issue to eventually reach the Supreme Court. The judiciary in general–and this Supreme Court in particular–have been deferential to the Executive Branch in the area of immigration. However, there is a long-standing principle that ambiguous statutes are interpreted in favor of non-citizens and that Green Card holders are protected by the First Amendment right to free speech. How these competing interests will play out at the high court, we shall see, but until we have some clarity, non-citizens who speak publicly about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict face a risk of harm from the current Administration.
* * * * *
One last point. Several right-wing Zionist organizations have identified pro-Palestinian activists online, and have claimed credit when they were arrested. Whether these organizations are actually responsible for the arrests is not clear, but the organizations have certainly celebrated the Administration’s efforts to allegedly combat antisemitism by targeting pro-Palestinian immigrants.
For several reasons, I think these efforts are bad for the Jews. First, by arresting primarily Muslim non-citizens in the name of Jewish people, the Administration is pitting Jews against Muslims and trying to drive a wedge between our communities. Second, the Administration is reinforcing antisemitic tropes (such as Jews control the institutions), and so we will take the blame for the arrested non-citizens. Third, by labeling opposition to Israel as anti-Semitic (or pro-Hamas), we conflate legitimate criticism of Israel with actual antisemitism, which dilutes the term “antisemitism” and makes it more difficult to condemn those who actual hate Jews. Finally, the push to punish free speech is contrary to Jewish values, which have always supported robust debate.
As my rabbis have stated, “Freedom of speech, and the freedom to practice our religion, have long protected Jews in America.” If we as Jews allow the erosion of those principles–especially when done in our name–it is not only pro-Palestinian immigrants who will be harmed. Ultimately, the danger will reach us all.
I have noticed a pattern.
In a lot of cases, the Supreme Court tends not to address the merit of the issue.
But instead, they focus a lot on technicality like venue, standing, jurisdiction such…basically acquiesce what the republican administration is doing. I feel that they side with Trump and Texas-based 5th circuit a lot…but they tend to disagree a lot with Obama/Biden and SF-based 9th circuit…is this Supreme Court inherently biased and partisan ? I thought Supreme Court justices are for all American people and not just a selected few ? No ?
Also, I am just worried that if Supreme Court behaves like this, then the trump administration could just sue in Texas court and will eventually get a win from 5th circuit…and Supreme Court find ways to turn down appeal with the excuses of technicality…Basically Trump can just do what he wants by passing harmful policies and get 5th circuit endorsement…
Is there anyway that Supreme Court not use technicality like venue, standing to not address the merit of the appeal ? Because I feel that venue, standing etc doesn’t seem to impact Supreme Court doing analysis on the merit of the issue…why then they can’t just proceed to address the merit of the issue, in spite of technicality flaw ? Like I feel that whether a case is filed in Texas or DC shouldn’t be an impediment for Supreme Court to address whether AEA deportation is constitutional…I somehow feel that they are just using technicality as an excuse to not oppose Trump’s execution overs ….
Do you think I have a point ?
SCOTUS justices are inevitably partisan based, because the new justices are appointed by the incumbent president and confirmed by the senate with a simple majority vote. If the judges are elected (directly or indirectly through a system similar to electoral college), with fixed term length and fixed term limits (maximum one or two terms), we may have less partisan and more impartial justices within the judiciary. But that sounds way too complicated already.
Election of justices is not defined in the USC at all. There are numerous ethical concerns with regard to campaigning and conflicts of interest. Some suggest a combination of both, involving appointment by an independent qualified committee combined with a retention vote after a specified period of service. However, many also argue that elected justices are predominantly swayed by public opinion instead of following the constitution…
There is no perfect solution here, the debate has been going on for decades…
The whole point of life tenure is to prevent judges from having to deal with politics and to help them be more independent. It is not perfect, but I do think it encourages judges to be independent and we have seen several judges appointed by Trump push back against some of his actions. Take care, Jason
I think the Supreme Court does try to take a narrow view of its own jurisdiction. It makes sense, as conservative Justices generally do not want the court to intervene unless the Constitution or a law is being violated, but it would also be helpful to get some clarity on some of these issues. I expect that will happen soon enough, though I have little confidence we will be happy with the results. Take care, Jason
What’s ur personal opinion regarding the outcome of AEA with regard to its constitutionality ? Will SC find it constitutional or not ?
You were right regarding TikTok. So I value your opinion.
It sounds like the Supreme Court will not permit people to be deported under the Act without a hearing, but we shall see. Take care, Jason
The government will use AEA to bypass normal immigration court process
Any updates on GC for asylees and refugees ?
I hear that people getting schedule for interviews , multiple lawyers said that…do you have any cases in your firm scheduled/approved?
This is such a meas…
I have not been following that at my firm, but since we do not know what the “pause” means or who is affected, I would not be surprised if some GC applicants based on asylum/refugee status are being interviewed and approved. Take care, Jason
Hello sir, i have a 5 year work permit . I have asylum case pending with uscis . I applied my asylum case after 4 years in usa overstayed due to changed personal circumstances ( gay ). I want to fly to us territories and alaska and hawai , puerto rico, american virigin islands, guam , american samoa , northern mariana islands. Can i go or no. Do you see cases of people being detained at airports flying domestically. Alaska and hawai are i think domestic or are there ice agents on domestic terminals or flights. How about visiting us territories is it safe. My concern is ice could say you overstayed 4 years then applied asylum so i have unlawful presence and could deport me .
As long as you do not travel through any other country, Alaska and Hawaii should be safe (assuming you have the required documents to board a plane). Puerto Rico was safe, but I have heard about at least one person running into trouble trying to return, and given how much more difficult things are getting, I am not sure it is a good idea. As for the others, I think it is a bad idea – I know you need a passport (and presumably Advance Parole) to return from the US Virgin Islands, and years ago, I heard about someone getting stuck in American Samoa for a year or more due to an immigration issue. Take care, Jason
Jason, Grateful for becoming voice of millions like us.
I am writing to kindly request your guidance regarding our timeline and the earliest possible date we would be eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship. Below, I have provided the key dates from our immigration process for your reference:
Asylum Court Approval Date: October 20, 2020
Green Card Valid From: June 14, 2022
Based on the above information, I would greatly appreciate it if you could advise us on the earliest date we may be eligible to file for naturalization. We want to ensure that we follow the proper timeline and meet all necessary requirements before submitting our application.
Thank you in advance for your time and assistance. I look forward to your guidance.
There are other factors, such as no long departures from the US and that you have spent at least 50% of your time inside the US, and that you don’t have disqualifying criminal or other issues, etc. But just in terms of the time, and assuming you are otherwise, eligible, you can apply 5 years after the date listed on the GC. You can mail the N-400 up to 90 days before the 5-year anniversary, though I would not send it any earlier, as it could be denied as filed too early. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
First of all, I want to express my deep gratitude for your incredible service to the asylum community. Your forum has been one of the most helpful and informative resources during my journey, and I truly appreciate everything you do.
I have a question I hope you can help with. My asylum was approved by an immigration judge in July of last year. Due to significant delays in the interview process and multiple court hearing cancellations, I decided to pursue the EB-1A route. Shortly after my asylum approval, my EB-1 petition was also approved.
Out of concern that a future administration might make changes affecting asylum seekers, I chose to apply for adjustment of status based on my EB-1A approval. Currently, my AOS is pending. My wife has already received her AP and EAD based on the pending I-485. I did not apply for a new EAD because I still have a valid EAD under category C-08, which is set to expire in 2029.
However, recent statements by DOGE have raised concerns regarding asylum-based EADs and work authorization, which is completely nonsense as they don’t know why Asylum pending gets the EAD. I want to make sure I’m on the right path moving forward.
My question is:
Should I now apply for an EAD based on:
1. My approved asylum status,
2. My pending I-485 application, or
3. Should I continue using the C-08 EAD I already have until it expires in 2029?
I would sincerely appreciate your guidance on this matter.
Thank you so much again.
Hi EB1A
Did you leave the country to get your your EB-1 visa approved? Please let me know your experience. I am thinking of applying. Thanks
We don’t have to leave the country to apply and get the approvals for EB1A.
Thank you very much!!!
You do NOT need an EAD, since you are allowed to work, BUt if you want one you can apply and it’s free(A05)
1.This is the ONLY one you can get EAD based on Asylee status A05
2.You are NOT eligible to get an EAD for i-485, since you ead category is Asylee A05
3.your C08 ead is technically expired/terminated due to your new status as an Asylee(A05) , I don’t know the technicality and if USCIS will return as INVALID, but technically you are now fully legal and can work WITHOUT any EAD or you can APPLY for one under A05, apply as INITIAL and it’s FREE!! Takes 4-6 months to get.
Sir, please let the Jason, answer. This isn’t easy question and my case is complicated. I know I can apply for the free EAD on approved asylum but my adjustment is pending on the EB1A base and don’t wan’t make my case more complicated. For eligibility my wife has already received the EAD/AP combo card as derivative is I am also eligible for that. Thanks
If the person filed a form I-485, they should be eligible for an EAD while that I-485 is pending. Take care, Jason
If asylum was approved, you should automatically receive a new EAD based on a-5 (asylum granted). If you did not, you can apply for that and it is free, since it is the first asylum-approved EAD. You can also Google “post order instructions in immigration court” for more info. Alternatively, I guess you can apply for the EAD based on the pending I-485, but that has a shorter validity period and you have to pay for it. I have not heard anything about DOGE and asylum, but I doubt they will take EADs away from people who been granted asylum. Take care, Jason
I applied for asylum in 2016 and was granted asylum by a judge in 2021 under the previous rule involving the one-year bar. I applied for my green card one year after being granted asylum, as required. I received my green card in 2023; however, USCIS listed my “resident since” date as 2023 instead of backdating it to 2022, which they are supposed to do under immigration policy. Given the current situation and how unpredictable USCIS processing can be, I’m considering whether it’s a good idea to submit an online request to correct the error and ask them to backdate my permanent resident status to 2022. On one hand, it’s a valid request supported by policy, and having the accurate date could help with naturalization eligibility sooner. On the other hand, I’m unsure if raising the issue now might cause delays or complications. Should I go ahead and request the correction, or just leave it as it is?
If I recall, you may need to send in the original card to get the correction (check the instruction for form I-90, available at http://www.uscis.gov). I have not done it, and I think it is probably not worth the trouble, but it does cost you a year. I guess you can also try filing to naturalize 4 years after the date on the card and explain (with evidence) how the card should have been back-dated. I would not do that myself, as I would be afraid it would be denied and we would lose the $1440 fee. However, if you don’t mind risking the fee, you can try that. Take care, Jason
Good morning Jason,
Do you know how long the pause on processing refugee and asylum-based green card will take?
I have not seen info on that and so I do not know how long the “pause” will be or who is affected. Take care, Jason
Newsflash: Reuters is reporting that the Supreme Court has allowed the administration to proceed with mass deportation using alien enemies act. If true, please be careful. Since this is a big man, they would also use other things in their arsenal.
This ruling seems like a mixed bag. One the positive side, the Supreme Court says that non-citizens have the right to due process and can challenge the government’s effort to label them gang members without evidence. The main reason they lost the case was because the Court said that the case should have been filed in Texas and not in DC, and so venue was improper. Kind of a cop out, but there will be more litigation on this issue and we will see what happens when venue is not an issue. Take care, Jason
This is somewhat of a political ruling. In my honest opinion, with 6 conservative judges among which 3 appointed by Trump, they have a strong inclination to vote in favor of this administration. In a closely related proceeding, Judge James Boasberg has ordered the plane to be turned back effective immediately, presented evidence that the plane has not touched down in Salvador. Therefore, the court has jurisdiction over the plane in motion. It has been conspicuous to many legal experts that the Trump administration defied the court order. Will there be any consequences for this administration even if judge Boasberg initiated a contempt of court proceeding? Seems very unlikely. The majority of justices in the current SCOTUS have no motivation to hold anyone accountable.
This is the real constitutional crisis, where trump can do whatever he wants without worrying about taking any legal responsibilities with his absolute immunity. The favoritism of SCOTUS towards trump will empower him even further to make this state more authoritarian. Soon we may forget what democracy and separation of power look like. Speak from the perspective of an asylum seeker who escaped from authoritarianism.
I agree with all this. Maybe now that Trump is tanking the economy, he will lose some support, which may make Congress or the courts more willing to stand up to him. But so far, we have not seen that and it does seem that we are racing towards authoritarianism. Take care, Jason
Hey Jason,
I’m not sure what’s going on, but the approval rates for RTD cases at the Nebraska service center are really dropping! Another delay! Isn’t 13-14 months long enough to get the RTD back during Biden’s time? It seems to be getting worse! It’s been exactly 14 months since I applied for my RTD renewal, and I still haven’t received it! I had to sue them for my green card, which finally got approved two years ago, but I really don’t want to spend $4500 again just to fight for a travel document!
I don’t really know what’s happening at USCIS, but last time under Trump, the agency had a crisis of funding for a while until they somehow magically got some money to keep going. We’ll see what happens this time. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
Good day.
While I was waiting for my Master Calendar Hearing, I got married in 2021. My spouse filed an I-130 petition on my behalf, which was approved. I proceeded to apply for Adjustment of Status (AOS) in 2023 and successfully filed a motion to terminate my removal case at the Immigration Court. The process went smoothly without any objections from the Attorney General.
While my AOS was being adjudicated, I traveled to Europe using my I-512 and Ethiopian passport and returned to the U.S. without any issues. Although my case status initially indicated that the interview was waived, I recently received a notice for an interview in a few weeks.
At this point, my spouse and I have been married for nearly 4 years, and we now have a child together. The application includes all the required documentation, including our child’s birth certificate. So I feel less nervous than before.
However, given my asylum background, I wanted to ask what I might expect during the interview.
Thank you for your guidance.
This is an AOS interview? If so, I would expect the standard questions, mostly what’s on the I-485 form, and maybe some questions about the marriage, but that seems pretty legit. I guess they could ask about the asylum. Normally, that does not happen, or if it does, it is very few questions. However, the Trump Administration is pretty vicious and so I guess that is possible (though again, doubtful). Maybe just review your asylum case beforehand and make sure there are no inconsistencies between the I-589 and the I-485, and if there are, be prepared to explain them. Also, I guess they could ask about using your passport to travel, so you should be prepared to explain that as well. Take care, Jason
I am probably the only person who has been saying, it’s risky for noncitizens to travel overseas…
In the past I am met with ridicule and accusation or rebuked for fear mongering… people will say it’s okay to travel overseas, I never had anybody have issue
Nowwwww, the sentiment seemed to have changed…I see more and more advice saying that people who haven’t been naturalized are discouraged from traveling overseas…
So..:I deserve some recognition for being foresighted…right ? I am right a lot of times, I remember as early as 2021, I predicted that trump will be re-elected in 2024…
I’m expecting a baby soon and want my mom to come on a visitor visa to visit. Will my asylum status affect her visa application?
Generally, no, as she cannot benefit from your asylum status (only your spouse or child could benefit from that). However, the fact that you filed for asylum might make the consulate think that she will also file for asylum, which may make it more difficult for her to get a visa. She will need to have good evidence of attachments to her country (other family members, house, property, job, etc.) to show that she plans to return after her visit. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason ,
hope you are doing well !
I have a very candid question , looking at what is happening globally and in USA …. Tariffs. … trade wars …. uncertain economy …. costs of living rising…. immigration issues and lot more….
do you think and believe that US is still the right place to live …..
We are certainly headed in the wrong direction, and if I were an immigrant refugee and had a choice, I am not sure I would come to the US, but people often do not have a choice and they go where they have family and think they can be safe. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
My asylum case was approved six months ago. How long do I have to wait before I can apply for a green card (adjustment of status)?
Also, if I submit my application now, will I receive a response from USCIS, since the green card applications are currently paused?
Thanks
You can file at any time. Many lawyers, including me, have been recommending waiting 6 months after you received asylum, and I explain the reasons in a post dated February 6, 2023. If you file, you will receive a receipt and maybe a biometric appointment (though for most people, such appointments are no longer needed). Whether the “pause” will affect your case or how long it will last, we do not know. Take care, Jason
Jason,
Thank you for the response few days back . We applied online for her work permit in Dec 2024 hoping she gets in 6 months before time to join college in the autumn of 2025 but currently wait time is showing 11 month meaning will get in March 2026. What do we do so that she can have the work permit before college starts in August 2025 ?
Jason, what is your opinion about DOGE and USCIS? Yesterday, the Verge reported that Doge staffers, led by the now-famous “Big balls,” have just been given access to USCIS DataLake, which is the entire gamut of different databases, which are backends of case management and other systems that hold data related to immigrants and their statuses. My guess is that they will be using different tools or AI to target applicants. Not sure what the goal is, as this is clearly not about firing workers (USCIS systems do not hold their own employee data).
I don’t know anything more about it, but USCIS data has historically been a mess – at least what they have released to the public. I could imagine them using this for different purposes – maybe to identify people with a criminal history or the AI could look for red flags for fraud, though if past performance is any indicator, they will just harm random people who have not done anything wrong. I guess we shall see. Take care, Jason
My asylum work permit renewal was denied i-765 c(8) based on pending asylum. I had 2 year work permit now was waiting for 5 year work permit. I applied in aug but was denied in march end. Can i file again. But my ead is already expired can i still work with receipt ? Or that 540 day receipt only work if ead is still unexpired .my ead expired while waiting for renewal . And i guess that 540 days also ended with that . If i file new application for i-765 renewal will i again get 540 days.
Frankly this is a big worry of mine. If I don’t have work permit, my economic situation will take a severe dip
Replying to Jimmy
What is your current status? Are you on TPS, humanitarian parole or pending Asylum? What is the reason behind denying your work permit? Did they sent you a denial letter and what does it says? I am always worried about taking away work permits.
You only get the 540-day extension if you file before the current card expires, so it sounds like you won’t qualify for that. You should figure out why the form was denied so you can correct any mistakes. Also, maybe you want to file online at http://www.uscis.gov, if you have an account, as you will get a receipt quickly and you can upload documents and respond to any evidence requests. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason,
I know this may sound a little unrealistic or even delusional. However, what is the best recourse to prepare for the worst? Namely, if this administration decides to use Alien enemies act (or something similar) again and tries to immediately detain and deport aliens (which they deemed as terrorists or enemies) without due process, what can we do to prevent this? The fact that there is a case like J.G.G. v. Trump is flabbergasting…
I know of no simple solution. Everyone – individual immigrants, there families and friends, lawyers, companies, and organizations – should do the best we can to help each other and push back against the many dangerous and harmful changes the Administration is implementing. Take care, Jason
Pending asylum case in court with no date yet for individual hearing.
Filed i130 in 2024 and this morning i got an enail stating that an action has been taken on the case but on checking my uscis account i didnt see any action taken on the case. Please does any one know what this typically means? If there by any case of not getting interviewed for i130 in this scenario? Just confused and will appreciate a response. Thanks always
It may be an internal action that has no noticible effect, or maybe you will get a notice by mail (or on the portal). Take care, Jason
Hello Jason I know this probably been asked but am trying to find out with the new administration how safe is it for someone to travel to the country they flee from after granted Asylum and gotten naturalized as a citizen now so the question is. Is it safe to travel to my home country now that am holding a us passport or could there be problems doing so nothing seems clear
Nothing is clear, except that the Administration is treating many people cruelly. I have not heard about any naturalized citizens having trouble for this reason, but if the trip causes the government to suspect that your original asylum case was fake, I suppose they could start looking into that and try to de-naturalize you. That is a long and difficult process, and so it seems very unlikely. Maybe if you are prepared to explain why you returned and how you stayed safe, you can explain yourself (in the unlikely event anyone asks) and avoid further issues. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
Even if a person got naturalized through asylum why are not supposed to go their home country. Basically we changed our nationality to American so what’s the issue with the CBP or some other government. Literally it’s golden cage for asylum seekers.
Thanks!
Former asylees and refugees with US citizenship can generally travel freely, and I have never heard of such a person getting into trouble for returning to the home country. However, given the viciousness of the current Administration, it is best to be cautious about such a trip if you have any reason to believe it would make the government think your old asylum case was fake, and in that case, you should at least be able to explain why you went home and how you stayed safe. Take care, Jason
It should be easy to be explained away right ?
Because if they are naturalized us citizen…
Then they can ask embassy for protection…right ?
Hi Jason, I applied for affirmative asylum in 2016 and I just got an update on USCIS case status that my interview has been scheduled, It will be in Arlington office but I am waiting for the letter in the mail to know the actual date and time. I read your “Go Faster” post so my questions are; should I expect the interview in 10 days or 1 month? is delaying the interview ever a good idea? (I already have my EAD). Also, wondering what else can you tell me so that I am as prepared as I can be to win my case during that interview and avoid being referred to court. Thank you!
Gather all your evidence now and make sure you are ready. By the time you get the letter, you will likely only have a few days to submit evidence. In order to postpone the case, you either have to go in person on a Thursday morning or send a letter by mail. They no longer allow email reschedules, which is a real disaster. I suspect that they want people to be unable to prepare in order to postpone interviews on the day of, so that they can reduce their workload, as they are being overworked, but I am not sure. It is just a theory. Also, you can postpone. When we have done that, it gets us a few more weeks or maybe a month. The postponements are not long, but they are usually necessary in order to properly prepare a case. Take care, Jason
So…can a person seek asylum based on HIV status for the purpose of better medication ?
In some countries, HIV positive people receive medications which both reduce the viral load but also have huge side effects to kidney and liver, that will bring irreversible harm to their body, thus decrease their life span, sometimes by decades. In my opinion, refusing to provide good medication to the point that life span is intentionally shortened should be considered a form of persecution. These countries try to reduce the source of infection in a cost-effective way by essentially, “poisoning” HIV positive patients because they either refuse to import good HIV medications or intentionally charge prohibitively high price for it that average people cannot afford.
In the U.S. they can get better medication and live longer, their life is not threatened because of poisonous HIV medication that substantially harms kidney and liver, which I think people deserve. People who are dependent on life-saving medication should be able to have access to non-poisonous HIV medication. Otherwise, their life span is threatened and I think that appears to very much qualify them for asylum ?
Do I have a point ?
“In an often-cited BIA decision, the BIA defined persecution as harm or suffering inflicted
upon an individual in order to punish the individual for possessing a belief or
characteristic the persecutor seeks to overcome.11
The BIA later modified this definition and explicitly recognized that a “punitive” or
“malignant” intent is not required for harm to constitute persecution.12 The BIA
concluded that persecution can consist of objectively serious harm or suffering that is
inflicted because of a characteristic (or perceived characteristic) of the victim, regardless
of whether the persecutor intends the victim to experience the harm as harm.13
Additionally, the BIA has found that the term “persecution” encompasses more than
physical harm or the threat of physical harm so long as the harm inflicted or feared rises
to the level of persecution.14 Non-physical harm may include “the deliberate imposition
of severe economic disadvantage or the deprivation of liberty, food, housing,
employment or other essentials of life.””
I think that the government intentionally not providing non-poisonous HIV medication to the point that an HIV positive person needs to either die of AIDS or take poisonous HIV medication seems to squarely fit the definition of persecution, from my perspective as a layman. What do you think ?
Replying to Textual support
HIV/AIDS kills if not treated on time. It mess with your immune system and your body can’t fight other infectious diseases.
When it comes to the current state of medications, due to the science not fully developed, we always face challenges in curing disease without causing side effects. One of such challenge is the medication you swallowed or injected will indiscriminately distribute in your body and hit not only the target organ but other parts of the body.
The reason why most HIV medication are poisonous is as a result of what I have already mentioned. On the other hand, currently scientific research is focusing on target drug delivery to avoid those side effects.
We need more medical research to come up with better and less poisonous drugs. However that doesn’t mean these poisonous chemicals won’t delay HIV/AIDS mortality. They do a magic. A recent study in US found out if a person takes his/her HIV medication properly, they won’t transmit HIV to a single person they have sex with.
So a government who is preventing their citizens from taking HIV medication are not only killing that person, they are also causing HIV transmission in faster rate.
For the question, “Should such person get a protection in US” I don’t know what the law says!
If you are being deprived of medication in order to harm you on account of your race, religion, nationality, political opinion or particular social group, then maybe. Take care, Jason
If a person is not deprived of medication
But only given 2 reasonable choice:
1) not taking meds or 2) taking meds that seriously that harm vital organs…then I think they are functionally deprived of effective treatment.
I also believe that malicious intent is not a requirement for a finding of persecution. Even if the government “benevolent” objective is to try to control HIV transmission in a cost-effective way by “let those who are positive die quickly” for the well-being of the HIV negative population. Shouldn’t it still be counted as a form of deliberate harm ?
I guess it would depend on the specific situation; it is difficult to answer as a hypothetical. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
A person who came to US on F1, applied for asylum but didn’t continue with degree will have any negative impact on asylum case?
If that person wants to get degree now but will have to pay Out-of-State tuition (as far I know) even though he is paying taxes for years. Wouldn’t this be considered as educational/career impact?
Thank you
I doubt that would have a negative effect on his asylum case, unless maybe he commit fraud to get the visa (and even then, if he lied to escape danger in his country, it would not normally block him from asylum – see a case called Matter of Pula). Also, as far as I know, when an asylum seeker with a work permit attends school, he has to pay out of state tuition, but that may vary by state, I do not know. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,Thank you for all what you do.
My Friend applied for form 1-485 in 2023 after granted asylum from IJ.and in September 2023 his case was transferred to a different USCIS office stating it was for speeding up the process.In March this year they transferred his case to National Benefit Center and the Receipt Notice they stated they have completed a preliminary review as part of standard processing ,stating the new office has the jurisdiction over the case and they will notify me when the office make the decision.His case has been pending for 26 months now ,do you think he has something to worry about regarding his case.
Thank you.
It does seem longer than normal, but many people wait a long time. He can check the case processing time on http://www.uscis.gov and if his case is outside the normal processing time, he can make an inquiry with USCIS. He can also try to get help from his Congress person – there is a link under Resources called House of Representatives, where he can find his Congress office. Take care, Jason
Hello Githu
I have similar situation my case pending more than 24 months and waiting for interview in USCIS local field office. My question is your friend case from which service center transfered to NBC?
Thank you
Hello TM,Texas Service Center to NBC Lee’s Summit MO.
Have you been scheduled for an interview yet?
And where was your case transferred to?
Hello Githu
My case transferred from Texas Service Center to NBC. Interview not yet scheduled
Thank you
Hi Jason
Here is something that happened in the neighborhood. ICE officers in unmarked cars and normal everyday clothes with no badges suddenly entered a private apartment building and asked people for identification and arrested two people. There was chaos, and then the local church group asked how they had entered a private property with no warrants. It was mentioned that law enforcement can enter private property if they see illegal activity in plain view. The problem is that how did ICE detect illegal activity? Was it a bunch of brown people walking around? How does this work? Do they have warrants or do they just enter random apartments?
My sense is that they will do whatever they can get away with, but maybe they had a warrant (doubtful) or maybe a frightened person was intimidated into letting them in, or (and I am not sure) maybe certain areas of the apartment are “public” under the rules and ICE is allowed to enter those areas. Take care, Jason
-Respected Jason,
Hope you are all doing well. My wife is a principal applicant and I am a derivative of her case. Currently, my wife’s asylum is pending in immigration court, and scheduled for a master hearing in mid-July,2025.
Currently,I’m pursuing a professional license ( MORTGAGE LOAN ORIGINATOR) in New York. In order to get the MLO license, I’ve to complete state and FBI criminal background checks…. My question is if I go through with an FBI background check, is there any risk at this dangerous time ? Can the FBI, report my immigration status
to ICE? I’m confused what should I do. Please advise. I highly appreciate your help as always. Thank you very much.
I have not heard about an FBI background check triggering a contact with ICE, and I doubt that would happen, but I do not know for sure. Since you are already in immigration court, ICE obviously knows about you already, so I guess I am not sure that the background check would have any further effect. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I have a pending asylum interview since 2017 at the Arlington office. Do you see any recent changes of people getting interview? Any hope to expedite the interview? This is becoming very stressful.
Best regards,
Hailu
We are seeing people get interviews from 2015 and 2016. You can try a mandamus lawsuit, as that is a way to get an interview. You can also try to expedite – I wrote about that on March 23, 2022. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I received my asylum approval today, and I’ve come across conflicting information regarding when I can apply for a green card. Could you clarify the timeline? Would it be advisable to apply before the one-year mark?
Thanks,
Reema
Congratulations – it is nice to hear good news. You can apply any time, but I (and I think most lawyers) recommend waiting 6 months before you apply, but that is up to you. I explain the reasoning in a post dated February 6, 2023 – hopefully that post will be helpful. Take care, Jason
Jason, very well said!
The Secretary of State’s use of INA § 237(a)(4)(C)(1) to deport lawful permanent residents (LPRs) who have expressed pro-Palestinian views, to me, raises serious constitutional concerns. This provision, which allows deportation if a non-citizen’s “presence or activities” are believed to have “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences,” is extremely vague- especially in light of the fact that the government has not provided concrete evidence to support its accusations against these people, and it has not charged any of them with a crime- and grants unchecked discretion to the executive branch. Like you have alluded to, the lack of clear standards- and I would prefer if they are enumerated or listed- makes it impossible for individuals to know what speech or conduct might trigger deportation. This therefore invites arbitrary enforcement and violates due process protections under the Fifth Amendment.
Moreover, applying this provision to individuals who have publicly opposed the war in Gaza—most of whom were protesting what they determined to be genocide and humanitarian abuses, not supporting Hamas, btw—directly implicates the First Amendment. LPRs are entitled to robust free speech protections, especially regarding political expression. Equating peaceful criticism of a foreign government with support for terrorism is both factually unfounded and constitutionally dangerous.
The courts have long recognized that ambiguous deportation statutes must be interpreted in favor of non-citizens. Here, the provision fails to define what constitutes “adverse foreign policy consequences,” leaving it entirely to the subjective judgment of a political appointee (Rubio, for example). This effectively allows the Secretary of State to designate dissenting voices as threats, without judicial oversight or factual inquiry.
Thus, one could reasonably argue that the weaponization of INA § 237(a)(4)(C)(1) to silence dissent violates fundamental constitutional principles. It chills protected speech, lacks the precision required of laws affecting liberty, and sets a dangerous precedent where political beliefs become grounds for deportation. Courts should therefore recognize this as a textbook example of a statute void for vagueness and strike down its current application.
I think a federal district court did find that the statute was void for vagueness under the Constitution, but that was years ago and if I remember, that decision was overturned on a different basis. I do think there are very serious problems with this status. Whether that will be enough for the current Supreme Court to invalidate it, we shall see. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason, Thanks for everything you do
I am asylee and I got My RTD after expedite, I am From Colombia and I would like to travel to see my parents after 8 years, can I travel in this scary times, I will travel to a 3rd country, I never had convictions, traffic court, do you think Colombia will be have banned, I know they pause the ban and don’t look like will be one of the countries in the list.
MY GC is pending.
As long as the RTD is valid, you should be fine to make that trip. The one unknown is that ban, and we don’t know for sure what countries will be affected, whether asylees will be affected, or when the ban will go into effect. If you travel, I would just watch the news and if a ban is coming, see if it affects you, and then maybe come back to the US quickly if necessary. Take care, Jason
I’m exactly like you, and in addition, I’m Palestinian, which means this administration doesn’t like me at all. I traveled to Italy last week and returned, and nothing happened to me. At Boston Airport, which is the most strict and toughest, on the contrary, when they delayed me because the system was down, they apologized for the delay.
Hello Jason, I received asylum approval few months ago and I need to go on vacation after being stuck in the US for nearly 9 years.
However, I’m concerned about re-entry. The main reason for my concern was because USCIS called me for a secondary asylum interview before my grant to discuss involuntary connections to an organization deemed extremist by some in the US government. Although I clarified that my involvement was limited to attending spiritual gatherings in the mosque and doing charity work, plus I was a minor under familial pressure to do this. I was granted asylum a few weeks after that.
I’m worried this might affect my ability to reenter the US. Can CBP officers access this information and deny me entry based on it? Thank you
I am not sure about that, and these days, the government is unpredictable in terms of what they do. My guess is that you would probably be ok, as long as you have a Refugee Travel Document and do not go to the home country, as I have not heard about people being detained under these circumstances (you also have to be aware of any travel ban in case that affects you). I think you will have to watch the news to see if people similar to you are having problems, and weigh your need to travel against any risk. Like I say, I have not heard about people similar to you being detained or having trouble, but given the current situation, I also can’t say that the risk is zero. Take care, Jason
I have a GC but worried to travel after the new about detaining green card holders at the boarders,I have no criminal record and never stayed outside of the US more than 3 weeks a year what’s your intake should we avoid traveling in this administration?
I think it is very rare for a GC person to be detained, and the cases I have heard about involved people with old convictions. It is a scary time, as the government is being arbitrary and cruel, but unless you have some prior criminal issue or a national security issue, travel should be fine (though do keep an eye out for any travel ban, as we do not know when that is coming or who it will affect). Take care, Jason
Hi Jason
Below is my online status. I got 2 interviews and I was told that decision will be mailed. I am super confused. Plz help. Newark asylum office. It’s been 9 days no letter and eoir phone system is also no case found for my a-number.
Decision was mailed.
We reached a decision on your application. You were scheduled to pick up the decision in person and you failed to appear at this appointment. Your failure to pick up the decision as scheduled is considered an applicant-caused delay for purposes of eligibility for employment authorization. We will send you more information.
Consequently your 180-Day Asylum EAD Clock has stopped as of March 25, 2025. As of March 25, 2025 you have 3312 days attributed to your 180-Day Asylum EAD Clock.
It sounds like the asylum office believes you were supposed to pick up a decision and you failed to appear. You can try emailing them – you can find their email if you follow the link under Resources called Asylum Office Locator. I am not sure about going in person, as I do not know the policy there, but on that same link, there should be info about the office and maybe they have walk-in hours. Finally, there is another link called EOIR Case Status. You can enter your Alien number there to see if you have a case in court (meaning asylum was denied and sent to court). If you do not get a decision from the asylum office, you can check that website regularly to see if a case appears in court (hopefully not). Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
we applied for asylum in 2016 and interview is still pending. My daughter came as a 9 year old and we filed for asylum as a family. My daughter is finishing her high school and has got admission into Princeton university, as an international student as there was no other option available in the college application with 90 percent aid. Normally an international student applies for F1 visa to attend school but since my daughter is pending asylum cannot apply for F1 visa , so in this case what should we do so that my daughter can attend college in august 2025.
Most colleges allow people to attend as long as they have a work permit. You should check with the school and hopefully, she can attend that way. If not, maybe they can advise you about other options, but normally, if she has a work permit, that should be enough. Take care, Jason
Jason,
Thank you for the response . We applied online for her work permit in Dec 2024 hoping she gets in 6 months before time to join college in the autumn of 2025 but currently wait time is showing 11 month meaning will get in March 2026. What do we do so that she can have the work permit before college starts in August 2025 ?
She can try to expedite – I wrote about that on January 29, 2020 and maybe that would help. Also, maybe there is a way to work with the school so she can attend school. It is worth reaching out to them to ask. Take care, Jason
For Jason and others,
I have found 2 guys who have had their GC interviews based on Refugee status after the “pause news” , last week. Both interviews went well and easy, officers processed as usual and no comments about pause or deferred approvals. In 1 case background checks needed to be updated because person applied in 2023 and in another case officer said he will finalize everything and will make a decision shortly.
Grate news.
I’ll guess many officers will use the comune sens of normality and follow the moral compass of their professional integrity.
Thank you for your info.
Thank you for the update. Which field office conduct their GC interview? How long it takes to schedule the interview after their case transferred to local field office.
Thank you
The problem is that we do not know what the pause really means and who is affected, as USCIS has not given any details. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason,
https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/maryland-father-deported-el-salvador-abrego-garcia-us-immigration/
The government has created a precedent of forcefully detention and removal of a WOR recipient.
I believe when people with WOR are going to report as scheduled to the ICE office, that day they will be detained and sent to the DHS black-wholes camps.
State and Federal judges decisions are totally ignored under the pretext of national security.
My grand parents experienced this treatment under Hitler and Stalin.
It looks like is my turn under Trump and Co.
Thank you for your blog.
I think most people with WOR or CAT will not face this problem, as it will take a lot of resources to detain and remove such people to third countries. But we will see. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
In January i’ve sent a ROP request to federal plaza to get my full proceeding, i got the email confirmation that they received it, but it’s been 3 months and nothing…..should i do it again? Website says don’t file blablabla it will slow everything down, but c’mon it’s not like they are good at remembering stuff
Maybe it takes longer in NYC, I do not know. You can try calling the court to ask – you can find their number if you follow the link under Resources called Immigration Court, or you can go in person to ask. Maybe if you can talk to someone there, at least they can give you an idea about the time frame or if there are currently delays. Take care, Jason