If you are reading this blog (which presumably, you are), you already know about the massive delays at our nation’s Asylum Offices. There are currently about 543,000 pending cases, and some applicants have been waiting for an interview for six, seven, eight years or longer. Given that life happens during this long wait, applicants sometimes want to withdraw their application for asylum. In this post, we’ll talk about when it might be appropriate to withdraw a case and how to do that. (more…)
I recently read an article in the Washington Post about the treatment of political activists in Iran: “Protesters arrested in Iran face a justice system stacked against them.” Political detainees in Iran are denied due process of law, denied access to a lawyer, and forced to litigate their cases in a tribunal that acts more like a prosecutor than like a neutral arbiter. Reading about the situation in Iran, I couldn’t help but think of my own clients’ experience with EOIR–the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the agency that oversees our nation’s Immigration Courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Here, we’ll look at some of the practices in Iran and compare them to what we see every day in U.S. Immigration Court. (more…)
This post is by Larry Gollub, who writes: I first encountered a proposal to create a professional corps of asylum adjudicators while in law school in 1985 and immediately knew that was what I wanted to do. I had to wait till 1991 for the government to create the asylum corps, but was hired with the second wave of new officers in 1992, serving with the asylum corps in one capacity or another until my retirement in 2015. I was asked to return to the training program on a part time basis in 2017 and stayed there through 2019. After returning to retirement, I worked with a group from the Asylum Officers union to draft Amicus Briefs to be filed in numerous court cases challenging Trump Administration policy changes. My main contribution was my detailed knowledge of the history of the asylum program.
About a dozen years ago, while researching just what the public thought an Asylum Officer did, I came across this post, by a person calling herself Lucette, in an online discussion thread conveniently titled, “Asylum Officer Qualifications”:
I am an immigration attorney with 3 years experience in Immigration Law and an interest in asylum law. I have successfully represented asylum applicants before CIS and in Immigration Court over the past three years. I am interested in a position as an asylum officer and I am wondering whether anyone would be so kind as to tell me whether my qualifications are such that I would be a viable candidate?
Lucette was constantly being passed over in her applications for employment as an Asylum Officer (“AO”) and wanted to know why. (more…)
On October 27, 2022, a group of torture survivors held a protest outside the Arlington Asylum Office. The protesters were asylum seekers who have been waiting for five years or more for an interview. Their request was simple: Please interview me and give me a decision in my asylum case. (more…)
I wrote last time about recent updates from the Asylum Division. Here, I want to focus on one element of those updates: How the Asylum Offices are dealing with asylum applications from Afghan evacuees.
Since Afghanistan fell to the Taliban in August 2021, about 88,000 Afghans have been evacuated by the U.S. government and brought to our country. These are generally people who cooperated or worked with the United States or the prior Afghan government, plus their immediate family members. These Afghans would be at risk of harm or death in their country due to their affiliation with the United States or the prior government of Afghanistan.
Ideally, we would have brought these people here and given them permanent status, so they could feel stable and safe, and so they could start rebuilding their lives. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. A bill to regularize the status of Afghan evacuees–the Afghan Adjustment Act–has stalled in Congress, and so the evacuees are left in limbo, not knowing whether they can stay or whether they will have to leave. As a result, many evacuees have no other option but to seek asylum. This situation is absurd and insulting, and–adding injury to insult–the Asylum Offices are mishandling the Afghan’s applications. (more…)
In a meeting held earlier this month, we received some updates from the Asylum Division. Although Acting Director Sue Raufer could point to some positive developments in asylum world, the news is generally pretty bleak. In a development that will shock no one, the worst news relates to the backlog, which is growing at an unprecedented rate.
This article is by Allen Schwartz, a former Asylum Officer who now offers consulting services to asylum seekers and attorneys. He may be reached at allen.schwartz@visaconsults.com or (305) 528-6474. Learn more about him at his website, www.visaconsults.com.
One year ago, I contributed to The Asylumist by submitting a post entitled Reflections and Advice from a Recently-Retired Asylum Officer. Now, as the number of affirmative asylum interviews continue to increase at Asylum Offices across the country, I would like to highlight some red flags that could occur during these interviews. A good number of these red flags may be due to Asylum Officer (“AO”) burnout and/or lack of sufficient training/experience. (more…)
The governors of Texas, Arizona, and Florida have been transporting asylum seekers from the border to “sanctuary” jurisdictions, such as Washington, DC, New York City, Chicago, and Martha’s Vineyard. Many of these migrants have suffered persecution in their home countries and have undergone difficult and dangerous journeys to reach the United States. The governors have enticed them to travel from the border to other parts of the country by falsely promising them jobs, work permits, and other benefits. In most cases, the receiving localities have not been forewarned about the new arrivals, and so have had difficulty coordinating a humanitarian response.
Immigration advocates have referred to these transfers as a “cynical political game,” a “publicity stunt” and a “political ploy.” Others have called it an effort to “own the libs.” While I agree that lying to vulnerable people and manipulating them is cruel and immoral, I think we on the Left are not being honest or wise when we dismiss the migrant transports as mere political theater. The issues underlying the governors’ efforts are serious and we ignore those issues at our peril. (more…)
This article is by Stanislav Stanskikh, a Visiting Scholar at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Research Fellow at UNC-Chapel Hill, and founder of The New England Institute for Country Conditions Expertise. He may be reached here: stanskikh [at] countryconditions.expert
There is an ongoing debate about whether Russians fleeing political repressions and the military draft should be granted refuge in the United States and the West, or whether protection should be refused so that these potential refugees rebel against the Kremlin instead. Opponents also draw a line between “real” refugees and those who left Russia merely to save themselves despite their prior loyalty to the regime. While the Baltic countries and Poland are turning away new arrivals, Germany and some other EU members have extended their welcome by generously granting refugee status. The President of the European Council Charles Michel favors opening the EU to fleeing Russians.
What about the United States?
It is not easy to convey the magnitude of the ongoing disaster at EOIR, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the office that oversees our nation’s Immigration Courts. Simply stated, the agency is rescheduling and advancing hundreds–maybe thousands–of cases without notifying attorneys, checking whether we are available to attend the hearings or checking whether we have the capacity to complete the cases.
On its face, this appears to be a mere scheduling problem. But in effect, it is a vicious and unprecedented assault on immigrants, their attorneys, and due process of law. (more…)
The longest-serving British monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, passed away last week. The Queen leaves a complicated legacy that has touched many aspects of life in Britain and the world beyond. She became queen in 1952, when women with power were few and far between. For the next seven decades, she steered the monarchy into the modern era. While she served as a spiritual and moral leader for her nation and the British Commonwealth, she rarely opined about political issues. Perhaps her effort to stay “above” politics helped her serve as a unifying force in Great Britain, where she remained widely respected, admired, and loved until her death last week at age 96.
In this post, I want to remember one small, but significant, incident from the Queen’s long life–the very first public speech she gave as a 14-year old princess on BBC’s Children’s Hour. (more…)
Recently, I have been presenting a new argument for my female asylum clients from Afghanistan–that if they return to their country, they face a “pattern or practice” of persecution. Under the Taliban government, women in Afghanistan cannot pursue an education or work in many professions, they cannot travel abroad or safely leave the house without a male companion, the government will not protect them from forced marriage or domestic abuse. For these reasons, the argument goes, any woman who lives in Afghanistan will suffer persecution. Ergo and ipso facto (to use some fancy lawyer language), every Afghan woman in the U.S. should qualify for asylum.
A similar argument could be made about asylum seekers from many different countries. Such a claim is particularly helpful where the applicant did not personally face any threats or harm, and so might otherwise have a weak case for protection under United States immigration law.
In this post, we will discuss the meaning of “pattern or practice” in the asylum context, who might benefit from this argument, and how to present such a claim. (more…)
Dear Asylum Office –
Did you ever have an annoying friend who keeps wanting to tell you what’s what? Who couldn’t accept that you’re not interested in his advice about how to improve your life? Who blathers on about this-and-that without noticing that you’ve nodded off? I get it. But here I am anyway. The fact is, my dear Asylum Office, you’re a mess and something needs to be done.
Please don’t misunderstand when I say that you’re a mess. I am speaking as a friend. Or maybe a frenemy. According to your own data, there are now (as of December 2021) more than 438,500 cases pending at our nation’s Asylum Offices. Many applicants have been waiting for years without an interview and with no real hope of receiving a decision any time soon. The good news is that you’ve hired 80 brand-spankin’ new officers to interview older (pre-2016) cases. But the concern is that these officers will not be used efficiently or fairly. Luckily, I am here to offer some unsolicited advice about maximizing efficiency and protecting due process of law. (more…)
Last month, I attended a family reunion/heritage trip for my wife’s family. Her maternal grandparents escaped from Austria to the United States prior to World War II. They and many others were forced to emigrate and leave everything behind because the government was persecuting Jews. (more…)
We learned last week that hackers have been using the Arlington Immigration Court phone number to make “spoof” calls requesting personal information from the recipients. EOIR (the Executive Office for Immigration Review – the office that oversees the Immigration Courts) warns that, to “protect yourself, be wary of answering phone calls from numbers you do not recognize” and never “give out your personal information over the phone to individuals you do not know.” Good advice. But how do you know whether a call from the Immigration Court is, in fact, fraudulent?
Fear not, for I stand ready to assist. Below are the top ten ways to know whether a phone call from EOIR is a “spoof” or the real deal. If you receive any of the following calls, hang up immediately because it ain’t the Immigration Court– (more…)