Let’s play a game. Below are a series of quotations. The speaker is either Donald Trump or Adolph Hitler. Your goal is to guess which leader made each statement. (more…)
I recently prepared an asylum case for a married lesbian woman. The case was complicated by the fact that my client had multiple nationalities, and I was concerned about one country where she held citizenship, and where conditions were less bad for LGBT people (at least when compared with her other countries of nationality). My focus was on gathering evidence about country conditions to support her claim, and I forgot to look at another key aspect of the case–my client’s wife had a pending asylum application of her own.
As these things often go, I was reviewing the case prior to the Immigration Court hearing when I noticed the issue. I spoke to my client and learned that the wife’s case included information that would have been helpful for my client’s case. So now I had a dilemma: Should we amend our case at the last minute and risk harming my client’s credibility (when she tried to explain the change) or say nothing and forgo the opportunity to include helpful evidence? (more…)
The murder of Laken Riley–a promising young nursing student–has spurred renewed calls for a crackdown against illegal migration into our country. Ms. Riley was allegedly killed by a Venezuelan man who entered the United States at the Southern border in September 2022.
In response to the killing, Republicans hammered the Biden Administration’s border policy: “Innocent Americans from Laken Riley in Georgia to the 14-year-old rape victim of an illegal immigrant in our home state of Louisiana…. They’ve all been victimized by those whom the Biden administration has released into our country,” says Speaker of the House Mike Johnson.
While there are instances of people crossing the border and then committing crimes, blaming all migrants for the bad acts of a very few is unfair and intellectually dishonest. That’s because immigrants–including “illegal” immigrants–improve our country in many ways and actually save the lives of many Americans each year. (more…)
It’s nearly impossible to win an asylum case if the Asylum Officer or Immigration Judge does not believe your story. But how do decision-makers determine whether an applicant is telling the truth or lying? In other words, how do they decide whether the applicant is credible?
There are a number of methods to evaluate credibility: Whether the applicant’s story is plausible (i.e., whether it makes sense in the context of country conditions), whether the person can describe details that we would expect her to know (for example, if she was a political activists, she should know something about her political party), and whether the applicant’s statement is consistent with the other evidence and testimony in the case. Today, I want to discuss “consistency,” since inconsistent statements are probably the most common basis for concluding that an applicant is not credible. (more…)
Last week, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) wrote a letter urging the Biden Administration to “take action to manage migration at the U.S. southern border in an orderly and effective manner while also ensuring a fair and humane process for people arriving at our borders.” That’s an excellent idea. The problem comes with the implementation, and here, AILA’s solutions fall short. (more…)
In an announcement earlier this month, USCIS claims to have “reduced overall backlogs by 15%.” This sounds like good news, and it would be–if it were actually true.
The reality, as discussed in the same announcement, is that “USCIS received 10.9 million filings and completed more than 10 million pending cases” in FY 2023 (October 1, 2022 to September 30, 2023). While completing 10 million cases is no small accomplishment, by my math, if the Agency received 10.9 million cases and completed 10 million cases, their backlog has actually increased by 900,000 cases.
So why does USCIS claim that the backlog has been reduced by 15%? The answer hinges on the definition of the term “backlog.” (more…)
There is a serious shortage of immigration attorneys. The dearth of lawyers makes it more difficult for non-citizens to obtain legal help. It also makes the immigration system less efficient.
A recent report from TRAC Immigration shows that representation rates in Immigration Court have fallen significantly in recent years. In 2019, 65% of non-citizens in court had a lawyer. In 2023, only 30% were represented by counsel.
What’s the reason for this shortfall? How is it affecting immigrants, lawyers, and “the system,” and what can be done to raise representation rates? (more…)
The long-awaited bipartisan border security bill has finally been released. The bill was negotiated by Senators Chris Murphy (D-CT), Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), and James Lankford (R-OK).
Before details of the bill were even released publicly, Donald Trump came out against it. His main objection seems to be a fear that the bill might improve conditions at the Southern border, which would potentially harm his chances for re-election. As a result of his opposition, many House Republicans–including Speaker Mike Johnson–have labeled the bill “dead on arrival.” It is even questionable whether the bill can pass the Senate. While the chances for passage seem low, the bill could still have an effect. If Republicans are seen as opposing reasonable border reform, it might just come back to haunt them in the upcoming election.
Politics aside, let’s discuss the provisions of the bill, and how it might affect asylum if it happens to become law. (more…)
Data from the Executive Office for Immigration Review–the office that oversees our nation’s Immigration Courts–is notoriously unreliable. Nevertheless, we have to use what’s available. In that spirit, let’s take a look at EOIR’s statistics for Fiscal Year 2023 (which cover the period from October 1, 2022 to September 30, 2023) and see what we can learn. (more…)
During the height of the pandemic, the Asylum Offices provided interpreters for applicants. However, since September 2023, USCIS has required asylum applicants to bring their own interpreter to the interview. This can be a problem for some applicants, as interpreters can be expensive. Also, some interpreters are better than others, and a bad interpreter can make it more difficult to win your asylum case.
Today, we’ll discuss who can serve as an interpreter. We’ll also talk about how to work with an interpreter, and provide some tips for the interpreters themselves. (more…)
Anyone with a case before the Asylum Office knows that the system is not functioning properly. Applications take years–many people who filed in 2015 are still waiting for an asylum interview–and even after you are interviewed, it can take additional years to receive a decision.
For most applicants, the only way to move their case along is to file a mandamus lawsuit. Indeed, data from TRAC Immigration shows that the number of mandamus cases filed against USCIS has ballooned over the last few years. In Fiscal Year 2020, for example, there were 1,295 mandamus lawsuits against USCIS. For FY2023, TRAC estimates that USCIS faced more than 6,800 mandamus lawsuits (these include asylum cases and other types of USCIS cases).
The TRAC data is consistent with our experience and with what we’ve been hearing from officials at USCIS, who indicate that the only way to get an asylum interview is to sue the agency. Here, we’ll discuss mandamus lawsuits and whether “premium processing” might be a better way to deal with delay at the Asylum Office. (more…)
To win asylum, an applicant must show that he faces persecution on account of his race, religion, nationality, political opinion or particular social group. But what do you do when you face harm not based on a characteristic that you actually have, but instead, based on a characteristic that the persecutor thinks you have? This is called an “imputed” characteristic, and it can be a powerful path to winning asylum. (more…)
Welcome to 2024! What better way to start off the New Year than with some predictions!
Just so you know, if some of these prognostications seem a bit negative, there is no need to worry: My success rate with prophesying is quite low, and so hopefully, I will be wrong. With that disclaimer out of the way, let’s get started. And remember, if any of these predictions happen to come true, you heard it here first! (more…)
It’s been more than a year now that we’ve been able to file the Application for Asylum, form I-589, online, and I think the verdict is in: The online system stinks. So much so, that I have decided to stop filing my cases online and return to sending the paper forms by mail. Among attorneys I know, I am not alone. (more…)
Trigger Warning: This post contains a lot of curse words.
What’s the reason for the forthcoming salty language? It’s because we immigration lawyers work in a system that is utterly broken, and in order to make any progress at all for our clients, we need to hold our tongues and remain professional with our government colleagues.
Immigration Judges, court staff, DHS attorneys (the prosecutors in Immigration Court), USCIS officers, and Asylum Officers all have a lot of power over our clients’ lives. Losing our temper with these people rarely results in good outcomes for our clients, and so we attorneys must practice forbearance. We often can’t say what we are thinking for fear of jeopardizing our clients’ cases. But today, I propose to throw off the veil of civility and say what’s on my mind. (more…)