So no law requiring clients to talk themselves in asylum interview or immigration court hearings ?

Testifying in removal proceedings, as a torture survivor, no legal background and sometimes language barriers (I know there is translation). The asylum seekers are not in the same footing as government lawyers and the IJs…

Asylum seekers’ lawyers are better trained in legal languages and knowledge. They know how to tell the story that emphasizes what’s needed for a win. They are also better at detecting government lawyers’ tricks. They also won’t be retraumatized by telling the story again. They are native speakers who can speak English better.

So all in all, I feel the lawyers should do the interview and basically do all the talking on behalf of the asylum seeker, in front of immigration court. Asylum seekers just need to sit there and attend the hearing, I think that’s enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CHxml4uvvI

In this video, the lawyer did all the talking. This is what needs to happen

Like this

Thanks a lot, Jason!!
Be blessed!! Happy Passover!!!!

Your feedback will be much appreciate as always.

If there a statute or regulations or law that says anywhere that “the immigrant must testify and conduct the interview by themselves but nobody could speak on behalf/in place of them ”?

If there is not, then it’s not disallowed.

“Under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, a criminal defendant has the right not to testify, and their decision cannot be held against them. In all but a few circumstances, I recommend that my clients do not testify in their own trial.”

Requiring a person to testify themselves but not allowing others to testify on his/her behalf is absurd. A person could easily be mentally incompetent and in that case, the lawyer is obviously in the best position to testify on that person’s behalf…

I would ask my lawyer to testify for me. I don’t like the adversary setting and I feel that government lawyers are more likely to challenge me cause they know it’s an easier opponent. They all have legal training, how could an untrained asylum seeker give the best answer when government lawyer, a trained legal profession, intent on ask questions to try to deny asylum seekers’ eligibility. Asking the lawyer to testify is simply leveling the playing field. Govt lawyer will know that they will not get anywhere if they try to pull any trick if they are faced with a similarly trained attorney.

I am not Jason, but as someone who has been through the process and inquired/researched before hand the answer is No. Your lawyer cannot tesitify on your behalf either in asylum interview, GC/citizenship interview or immigration court. They can clarify certain points, legalities and in immigration court they are given an opportunity for legal arguments. In any legal proceeding, a sworn testimony is given by the defendent themselves. An immigration proceeding is a sworn testimony where you have to stand up and take an oath. This would work the same in a criminal proceeding or a congressional testimony. A lawyer cannot testify for you. The only difference I have seen in an immigration court is that a judge can take over and ask the defendent a bunch of questions in an adverserial manner as if he is acting like a government attorney. This usually doesnt happen in a Article 3 court.

I checked INA, and I didn’t see anything saying that requires/mandates an applicant needs to testifying themselves.

I also checked the DOJ EOIR website, it never says that the applicant needs to saying anything themselves…

So…lawyers do all the talking…is probably not…disallowed…right ?