The Trump Administration has dramatically increased the practice of deporting non-citizens to third countries. As of May 2026, more than 21,000 people have been removed to at least 24 different countries. In many cases, the non-citizen has no connection to the third country and in some case, has never even been to that country. Upon arrival in the the third country, non-citizens can be subject to arbitrary detention, human rights abuses, and sometimes, return to their home country where they fear persecution.
Here, we’ll take a look at what the U.S. government is doing and who might be vulnerable to a third country deportation.
Earlier this year, Senate Democrats on the Foreign Affairs Committee released a report, which found that the “Trump Administration has expanded and institutionalized a system in which the United States urges or coerces countries to accept migrants who are not their citizens, often through arrangements that are costly, wasteful and poorly monitored.” “Deporting migrants to countries they have no connection to—once a rare tool used only in exceptional circumstances—has become a routine instrument of diplomacy.”
The report reached three major conclusions: “First, the Administration’s use of third country deportations is coming at great taxpayer cost.” “The United States has spent tens of millions of dollars to move a relatively small number of individuals to third countries.” “Second, the Administration is conducting questionable deals by making direct payments primarily to corrupt and unstable foreign governments with track records of public corruption, human rights abuses and human trafficking, relying on assurances that these countries will comply with certain obligations.” “Yet there is no evidence the State Department is monitoring how U.S. funds are used, tracking the treatment of deportees or enforcing the terms of these agreements.” “In some cases, U.S. officials have been instructed not to follow up at all.” “Third, the Administration is not being transparent with Congress or the American people about the extent of its deal-making with foreign governments… including what additional pressures and sweeteners it may be applying or offering up.”
According to Third Country Deportation Watch (TCDW), a project sponsored by Refugees International and Human Rights First, the Trump Administration has also “imposed or threatened third countries with visa bans, deportation of their own nationals, tariffs, and other trade barriers,” and has ignored or condoned “corruption, repression, and violations of human rights by governments in third countries.”
In other words, the U.S. government is ignoring our own human rights obligations and bribing or intimidating countries into accepting third-country nationals with little assurance that those people will be treated humanely. This sounds more like human trafficking than any sort of rules-based deportation system.
What countries are involved in this process? And what does this mean for asylum seekers and people granted Withholding of Removal or protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture?
The large majority of people removed to third countries are sent to Mexico. Of the approximately 21,000 deported third-country nationals, 18,000 went to Mexico. Most of these people are from Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. According to TCDW, “Cubans and Venezuelans are often released on the street without immigration documentation,” while “Guatemalans, Hondurans, and Salvadorans are typically deported by bus to their countries of origin”–even when they have a demonstrated fear of return to their country.
Of the remaining 3,000 third-country nationals, nearly half (1,460) were sent to Guatemala, more than 400 were sent to Costa Rica, and about 250 went to El Salvador, where many were detained in the notorious Terrorism Confinement Center (known by its Spanish acronym, CECOT). The remaining 1,000 people were deported to countries all around the world. Some were detained upon arrival, others were sent back to their home countries, and still others were left alone with no legal status or means of support.
Many of the targeted individuals seem to be people who arrived in the United States to seek asylum, and who were subject to expedited removal proceedings or who were simply expelled at the border without an opportunity to present their claim for protection. Others are people with final removal orders who the U.S. government could not send to the home country (maybe because the home country would not accept its deported nationals).
Still other deportees are people granted Withholding of Removal (WOR) or protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Such people cannot be deported to their home country, but they can be deported to a third country. Prior to the second Trump Administration, people with WOR or CAT were safe; deportation to a third country was extremely rare. For that reason, we sometimes settled an Immigration Court case by accepting WOR or CAT, or we did not appeal if a client received protection under one of these laws. But the second Trump Administration changed the rules, and so people who were once safe are now more vulnerable. So far, we don’t have a good sense of how many such people are being deported to third countries or where they are going. The TCDW report documents 18 people with WOR or CAT who were sent to the Central African Republic, and up to 36 more who were deported to Cameroon.
There are also reports of asylum seekers who were deported to a third country before they were able to present their application. I have not yet seen details about these cases, but I expect they involve Asylum Cooperative Agreements, where certain applicants have their asylum application “pretermited” (denied without a hearing) and are then ordered to go to a “safe” third country to seek asylum there. Of course, many of these countries are not really safe, and many lack a functioning or fair system to evaluate protection claims. Pretermission under these circumstances applies only to people who arrived in the U.S. on or after November 19, 2019, does not apply to unaccompanied minors, and seems mostly to be used against people who entered the U.S. without a visa.
I suppose the silver lining here is that aside from the removals to Mexico, the number of third country deportations is fairly modest. This is due to the difficulty and expense of sending individuals to third countries, and also to the limited willingness of countries to accept our third-country deportees. Whether due to cost, inefficiency or legal challenges, we can hope that this cruel policy will eventually end, and we will remember our moral and legal obligations to people coming to us for protection.
Hi Jason, thank you for this great blog you’ve built and for all your help.
I hope you can answer a few questions regarding adjustment of status. I was granted asylum in Sep of 2025. Should I apply for adjustment of status asap (i have prepared everything) or wait until after September 18th 2026, when the new filing starts? How will the new process affect adjustment of status based on asylum and will the processing time change? There is so little information about the new process that I don’t know if it would be better if I file now or wait. Any advise is appreciated
Assuming you have not spent a lot of time outside the US and do not have criminal or immigration issues, you should be eligible to file now. I believe there will be a new edition of the form in September, but I see no reason to wait for that. I am not sure exactly what changes you are referring to, but if it is the public charge rules, those do not apply to people who have asylum. If your goal is to get the case processed as soon as possible, it seems to me that you are better off filing as soon as you can. In terms of the time frame, that is unpredictable, and if you are from a “banned” country, it could be even slower if the ban returns to USCIS (at the moment, the ban is blocked by a court, but that could change). Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
Hope all is well, appreciate you for your help as always.
We had final hearing in Sept 2026 but IC postponed for Dec 2026 my case is in NY.
May be any good changes come at that time !
Now my attorney is asking me to update I 589 if we can add any thing we can some point,
So In I- 589 Part C and # 5 if i applied asylum with in 1 year of our arrival in US?
I applied after one year because my L1 status was still valid at that time.During that period,my family and I learned that the Revolutionary group(we are harmed by them) were continuing to send threatening letters to my house visiting our house and asking about us where we are now,they will kill us if they found us.
As a reasult,I decided to remain in the USA which caused the delay in filing my asylum application.
Now my question is in such situation is there any other matters I can explain that helps .
I look forward your reply.
With best regards
Jhampa
This does not sounds like new information, and so it should have been explained already. However, if there is new information that you need to add, you can do that. I am not sure what that would be, but if you were in lawful L-1 status until you applied for asylum, you should submit evidence of that (such as the I-94 and employment records). If you were in lawful non-immigrant status, that counts as an exception to the one-year filing rule. The lawyer should be able to assist with this as well, and make suggestions, as he knows the case best. Take care, Jason
Helo and thank you again for time and advices on this blog. Truly appreciate it. My question is can a bad credit score, collections etc affect your n400 application?
I do not think a bad credit score would affect a Naturalization case. If there are criminal charges against you related to the collections issue, that could affect the case. These days, everything is more difficult, and so I would recommend you talk to a lawyer about this before you apply, just to be safe. Take care, Jason
I have a friend who was on Yemeni Temporary Protected Status (TPS). TPS for Yemen has since been terminated. He applied for asylum and for what is commonly referred to as the “Einstein visa” (EB-2 National Interest Waiver).
Recently, he was charged with a third-degree felony involving sexual misconduct. He believes the allegations are racially motivated and xenophobic. He denies the allegations and maintains his innocence.
Because his TPS ended and his immigration status became precarious, he departed the United States and returned to his country of origin. Since federal immigration law supersedes state law, he believes he cannot return to the United States to contest the charges. Because he has never appeared in court, an arrest warrant has been issued. He believes it is doubtful that a state would seek or obtain his international extradition. The arrest warrant could remain active indefinitely, thereby preventing him from reentering the United States.
What are the implications of the third-degree felony charge for his pending immigration applications—his asylum application and his EB-2 NIW petition? And, if he traveled to countries that do not have extradition treaties with the United States, could he still be extradited? Finally, in your opinion, is it likely that authorities would seek to extradite him to face the charges, or would they instead be satisfied that he has departed the United States and returned to his country of origin, where he cannot reenter the United States?
I think the pending charge would be known to the immigration authorities (and he would be asked about it on any visa application), and so I think it is very unlikely he could get a visa to the US. He may want to talk to a criminal lawyer to see whether there is any way to contest the charge if he is outside the US. In terms of extradition, I do not know about that, sorry. There are lawyers who specialize in Interpol cases, and he could have one of those assist him to determine whether there is a notice seeking his arrest and extradition. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason I have been following you for more than 10 years now, I cannot explain to you how helpful you are to us.
thank you for being there.
I have a very sad story to tell you and I need you to just tell me did i ruin it all or did i help my famiily.
We came to US in December 2016.
We stayed with a family who helped us to to speak to an paralegal and get our documents in for asylum.
Because we came in December 2016, we had permission to stay in the US until June 2017 on our passports.
By March 2017 of that year we spoke to a lawyer and put in our papers.
By May 2017 we got our confirmation from USCIS case was received and it has been processed.
By August 2017, we went ahead and filed for our work permits.
By November 2017, we received our work permits and we started working on our drivers license and I got a job along with my husband.
Since 2018 we worked we never had any criminal history filed our taxes on time.
By 2025 January, we never received an interview call and were waiting all these years.
Suddenly we received an email beginning of 2026 we needed to pay annual asylum fee.
We then got a second email saying no need to pay annual asylum it has been waived.
It was updated on our USCIS account that we needed to attend an interview.
We got first call in Jan 2026
Second call for interview after we cancelled in February 2026
And third call in March 2026
Since 2024 to 2026 we have been trying to renew our passports and get back to our home country because one of parent was very ill.
In between this administraton sent us an email we needed to attend interview in not so good times.
We could not renew our passport because we are from third world country and it was just so hard for them to ever help us that was the reason for asylum in the first place itself.
We panicked and did not know what to do.
We rescheduled it, we got second interview, call and on the third interview call we just left the country.
I had been writing to you all along and I asked you if i could leave voluntarily and avoid the ban.
I just want to mention here again that we did apply for asylum before the 365 day period ended.
You advised i could leave and avoid the ban but voluntarily close the case when i leave the country and I did.
we came here in March 2026 and closed our case.
We miss our lives, our kids miss their lives, they miss the school.
They love their friend, we feel we lost all of it, we miss all that we built from ground zero and just had to leave because we feared ICE and arrest and no family to handover our kids if anything happened during the interview process.
I have a US citizen child, we needed to keep things clean for her and our future without getting arrested or being in removal proceedings or even have a court order to leave the country
I have a question to ask you a question please
Can i know if we are banned for 10 years even though we did not overstay the visa
Can I know if we are banned for 3 years ?
In the future when do you advise us to apply for visit visa if we want to come to US
How many years should we wait before we can apply for the visit visa
Does the history of applying for asylum forever stay in the system even after 10 years ?
One day when our US citizen child turns 21 can she petition for us and will any of what we did since 2016 be an obstacle for us.
Do you think they will give us the visa since we left peacefully and voluntarily?
We have a US citizen daughter do you think they consider that we did it all clean and help us obtain visit visa to atlleast visit the life we mad and come back to our country?
This administration is not immigrant friendly but in the future do you think we will get help we need if the democrats come in place after 2029 and immigrants will be allowed into the US and these tough and rough rules will change.
Lastly is there any way you think we can come back and we start over and open our case with USCIS is that even a thing ? We just miss our lives so much we travelled on emergency travel document and did not know we could have taken advance parole to get back. No family could help or advice us. Life is so unfair sometimes you have to leave a whole world behind just because you are scared of ICE or what they could destroy.
If we pay you for your services from here can you help us to come back to US ?
Many Many thanks for your Jason
Words are not enough to thank you ever !
I am forever grateful to you!
In terms of the ban, assuming you withdrew the asylum case and do not get a deportation order, the time you are banned from returning depends on how long you were here illegally. Your “illegal” time began when you went out of status in the US and ended when USCIS accepted your asylum application. If it was 6+ months, you are banned for 3 years and if it was 1+ years, you are banned for 10 years. From what you wrote, it seems that you have no ban at all, but you might double check with a lawyer if this is a concern. Also, make sure your case has not been sent to court. You can check that using your Alien number here https://acis.eoir.justice.gov/. If there is no ban, you can apply for a visa at any time, but given your prior asylum case, it will be more difficult to get certain visas (B or F, for example), whereas it may be easier to get other types of visas, such as H1b or L. Talk to a lawyer about that if you want to apply for a visa, as they can help present a stronger application. If you are able to come back, it sounds like you would need to file a new case; if you withdrew your old asylum case, that is no longer pending and I do not know of a way to reopen under these circumstances. If you need a consultation about your situation, we can assist with that – you can email intake@murrayosorio.com and they can help set that up. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I’m not the person you responded to in the parent comment, but I have a relevant question:
If someone applies for asylum while they are still in status (say, an F1 student), and that student status eventually expires as they graduate, how would a return ban work if one were to voluntarily withdraw their asylum case that’s still with the USCIS?
Will they be subject to restrictions that you have mentioned (such as if they have been out of status for a year, they will be banned for 10 years), or is it different?
Thank you!
Under this scenario, I think the person would not have a ban (at least not for overstaying the visa). If the person was in lawful status until they applied for asylum, and then withdrew the case (presumably after they left the US; otherwise, they would be sent to immigration court), they have not spent any time here unlawfully and would not have a bar for unlawful presence. Of course, if this is you, it would be worthwhile to talk to a lawyer about the specifics, as I do not know the details of the case, but I think there is a good chance that you would not have a bar to returning. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason, I want to thank you for all the support you are providing, you have been a real help. Recently I see that there have been a lot of denials for N-400 and I’m preparing to file my N-400 and would appreciate your opinion on one issue.
I received asylum several years ago based partly on a politically motivated criminal case opened against me in my home country after I attended an anti-government protest. I was never convicted or tried, and the case was disclosed during my asylum process. I later received my green card through asylum.
A lawyer who handles N-400 cases, but does not specialize in asylum, suggested that I try to check whether the foreign criminal case is still open or has been closed before filing N-400.
However, I have also heard that requesting a status check could do more harm than good. It might attract new attention from the authorities, create new documents or allegations, involve family members, or produce information that could complicate the N-400 even though the case was already part of the asylum claim.
In your opinion, is it normally worth investigating the current status of a politically motivated foreign criminal case before filing for naturalization? Or is it generally safer to disclose the case, explain that the current status is unknown, and rely on the records already submitted during the asylum process?
I am mainly trying to understand whether checking the case status would actually help, or whether it could create unnecessary risk. Thank you again!
I guess I am not sure how learning more about this old case will help with your naturalization or why it is relevant since you already disclosed it (and since, presumably, you have not returned to your country to commit more “crimes”). When I have had similar cases, we explain on the form that the person was arrested and/or charged with a crime, and that this was a political accusation and it was explained in the asylum case. That has been enough for my past cases. Things are more difficult today, as USCIS is looking for any excuse to deny cases, and so it would be good to be prepared to submit any evidence you have about the case (including country condition evidence indicating that your home country brings criminal charges against political opponents), but I would probably not submit that with the initial application, and would save it in case you are asked for it. Of course, this is just my approach in general, and maybe your lawyer has a good reason for you to investigate the status of the case. It is certainly worth a discussion with the lawyer, but based on what you wrote, I don’t really see why updated info about that case is needed. Take care, Jason
Friend of mine is in detention for four months. He had withholding of removal granted 3 yrs ago. He filed for habeas after they detained him. They wanted to deport him to one of the “third countries” and at some point they told him they don’t have adequate country for him at the moment. At the moment… Is there a waiting list of countries who desperately want to accept people who are not welcome here anymore, so suitable one will show up eventually when they enter the famous “third country list”?!?!? I’m being sarcastic rn. That’s all I have left I guess…
It is a complete disgrace to treat people this way, and it is based on numerous lies (immigrants are a threat and do not contribute to our country, for example). It also represents our government going back on its agreements. At the time your friend got Withholding, it was a stable status that allowed people to remain in the country indefinitely. Now, suddenly, the US government has changed the way such people are treated and is detaining and deporting them. It is possible to fight against these deportations by demonstrating a fear of harm in the third country, and if the US government cannot deport the person after 6 months of detention, the person must be released unless they are a danger to the community. Take care, Jason
Since that we are on this topic. I think I need your opinion, bc I’m not sure that I understand why his lawyer decided to file habeas without applying for bond first. His explanation was that because he won Withholding, it was risky to file for bond. Why? And now it is not smart to do it while habeas is in progress. But why not request bond hearing in first place before Writ of Habeas? I just don’t understand the logic behind that decision. And that’s been bugging us since… I hope I explained my concern properly. Thank you
The lawyer should be able to explain this better, but my guess is that the person is not eligible for bond, at least according to how the Trump Administration interprets the law. They take the position that anyone who entered the US without a visa is subject to mandatory detention, and so the purpose of the habeas is to order an immigration judge to hold a bond hearing. Otherwise, the immigration judge will refuse to hold a bond hearing because the judge will say that the person is subject to mandatory detention. If the habeas is successful, the person will then have an opportunity to request bond, and the immigration judge can issue bond or deny bond. In some cases, the habeas court orders the person released, thus bypassing the immigration judge (though the immigration judge would later hold a bond hearing anyway, after the person is released). Take care, Jason
He entered legaly and he doesn’t have criminal record. He applied for asylum two months after one year deadline, that’s why he got Withholding. He had solid case, and if he applied on time, his asylum would have been approved. His lawyer is one of those lawyers who communicates with people only through his assistant… so I got “i know what I’m doing” answer without any further explanation.
That’s not great. Lawyers are busy, and he may very well know what he is doing, but it is also an important part of the lawyer’s job to explain to you what is happening. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason. Thank you for your great job. I’m really glad to see how you’ve maintained this blog over time and how you’re still so active in responding to comments and answering questions. Do you have any advice for starting a blog?
Find someone with a lot of money to sponsor you? That didn’t work out for me. I do think it is helpful that this is a topic that interests me and that I like writing about asylum issues. If you write about what you like, it is much easier. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I hope you are doing well. my family and I just got our green cards and want to travel to Canada by road. We live in Seattle and don’t have our passports or travel documents yet. I just want to know if we are allowed to enter Canada and re-enter the USA without them?
Thank you
You can re-enter the US with your green cards, but I am not sure about the rules for going to Canada. Maybe you can check their website or call the embassy to ask. Take care, Jason
Hi everyone,
My I-485 is pending since July 2024 and was showed finger print completed, i did applied for I-131 on last May and on June i received finger print notice and i got my finger print done On June 10, today my 485 got updated again to finger print were taken i am so confused it was showing finger print was taken since July 2024, again today git updated for finger print were taken an funny part is my 131 application still showing case was received. Any advice?
This sounds like it is an internal USCIS issue and is probably not a concern. It sounds like they have fingerprints for both applications and are processing them (though they are going slowly, which is the case for most people). Take care, Jason
Thank you so much
After watching the recent killings involving ICE in Houston and Maine.I’m scared as never before,it’s simply can happen to any immigrant, these people are lawful criminals. They kill with total impunity,total support from the government ,I don’t understand why politicians are so calm with it ,
And to US citizens as well. It is not only the killings, but also deaths in detention (I think more than 25 so far this year). I also do not understand why more politicians have not taken some action to hold the agency and its officers accountable. To the contrary, Congress funded ICE for the next 3 years, so the agency has almost no accountability. Not only is ICE dangerous to immigrants, minorities, and others, it is also a threat to our democracy. Take care, Jason
Hi there Jason God bless you and thank you so much
I have a friend who has overstay their HYB Visa because they left their job about two years ago and are still in the US. They’re not from any of the band countries and they’re thinking of just writing it out until Trump leaves, but I know it’s a big risk but do you think if they decide to self deport or leave will there be any consequences?
Thank you so much
I have heard about some people being detained at the airport on the way out of the US. There is an app called CBP One that people can use to inform the government that they are leaving, and supposedly, people who have used the app have not been detained. I do not know how common these types of detentions are, and I suspect they are pretty rare. I think your friend would be even less likely to be detained if they have an H1b visa. That visa usually does not have a specific date listed for them to leave the US. Instead, the I-94 would say “D/S”, which means “duration of status”, so that they can remain in the US as long as they keep their job. CBP (border agents) would generally not know when their visa ended, and so would be unlikely to detain them for overstaying (since they would need to investigate the situation, which they probably would not do when your friend is departing the country). Your friend may want to talk to a lawyer to make sure there are no other issues, but otherwise, it sounds like they can probably just leave, and if they use the CBP One app, they should have a very minimal risk of detention (though they may have difficulty returning here, and they might want to talk to a lawyer about that too). Take care, Jason
God bless you
I got my asylum approval 7 years ago. In the interview the officer asked me if i have ever got weapons training and i said truthfully i did since i went through a mandatory military youth service in my country for 3 years after college.
In my green card the person who filled the form for me she did not care to ask me about this and answered No and i have never reviewed after her and signed the form and got my green card no issues five years ago.
I have applied for citizen ship a month ago and i filled my own n400 and i answered the weapons training saying yes and added explanation that was my mandatory youth service and added dates and all details. When i checked the i485 form i discovered the preparer said no to this question.
Could this discrepancy causes me issue in citizenship interview?
God bless you
I got my asylum approval 7 years ago. In the interview the officer asked me if i have ever got weapons training and i said truthfully i did since i went through a mandatory military youth service in my country for 3 years after college.
In my green card the person who filled the form for me she did not care to ask me about this and answered yes and i have never reviewed after her and signed the form and got my green card no issues five years ago.
I have applied for citizen ship a month ago and i filled my own n400 and i answered the weapons training saying yes and added explanation that was my mandatory youth service and added dates and all details. When i checked the i485 form i discovered the preparer said no to this question.
Could this discrepancy causes me issue in citizenship interview?
I do think this could cause USCIS to ask you why you said “no” on the I-485. We have faced similar issues before and when we explained what happened, it was ok. These days, USCIS is tougher and so they may give you a harder time. If you can prepare an explanation so you have that if needed, and gather any evidence about the issue (maybe proof that you told the asylum office about the military training), that would be a good idea. You might also want to have a lawyer with you at the citizenship interview, so the lawyer can help explain what happened. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
Last year, I asked you about the inconsistency between the N-400 and I-485 yes/no questions, especially regarding the question about prior arrests. I mentioned to you that my arrest was unlawful due to political opinion, so I answered ‘no.’ However, during the asylum interview, they were aware of both arrests but In my I-485 and even EAD applications from years ago, I answered ‘NO’ because I thought it referred to criminal arrests. You told me it was an easy fix as long as I answer ‘yes on the N-400 and explain what happened. I even consulted other attorneys, and they said the same thing. They emphasized that I need to inform the officer about it before they discover it, and that officers understand applicants can make mistakes. It’s okay to correct these errors, especially since they wouldn’t affect the outcome of my green card approval from 4 years ago, like being politically arrested wouldn’t make me ineligible especially this his was even mentioned in the asylum interview! But now, your response to the above comment has me worried because you said to take a lawyer with him, and that USCIS is being stricter about this! So, what’s the deal with that?
The situation now is worse than before and people need to be more careful. I think you can correct errors from the I-485 and explain, but I do think it is worth talking to a lawyer about the specifics, as USCIS has become more unpredictable and is more likely to consider an innocent mistake as a fraud. Take care, Jason
so many people mess up yes/no questions!!! Are they really going to accuse all of them of fraud!? Especially when the yes/no question was answered correctly during the asylum interview and the applicants just misunderstood it? That shouldn’t be the end of the world, right? Have you heard of anyone getting into trouble lately because of inconsistencies in yes/no questions across different applications? I’ve been watching a lot of attorneys live streams recently and they mentioned their clients were asked about these inconsistencies, but I didn’t hear anyone say it caused any real issues in the end. They just got asked to clarify why there were inconsistencies and that was it.
I have seen people accused of fraud for incorrectly answering questions. As you mention, it is very easy to make a mistake (even for lawyers) as many of the questions are unclear or contain multiple parts. The problem is worse for many asylees, as they often did not get interviewed for their I-485 application (green card application) and so had no chance to fix any mistakes, and so are forced to try to fix these problems after the fact when they file for citizenship. I have not seen anyone denied due to an error on a yes/no question, but I do think that is a possibility in today’s environment, and so it is important to be prepared to explain these errors and support the explanation with evidence if you have any. Take care, Jason