ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM

description

  1. Even with no new arrests, it would take four years to eliminate immigration court backlog. By Nolan Rappaport


    © Getty Images

    Credible fear findings in expedited removal proceedings are plummeting, and this may just be the beginning of a campaign to reduce the demand for asylum hearings.

    In expedited removal proceedings, aliens are deported after an interview with an immigration officer, without further proceedings, unless they express a fear of returning to their own countries.

    If they can convince an asylum officer that they have a credible fear of persecution or that it is more likely than not that they will be tortured if they return to their own countries, they will be scheduled for an asylum hearing before an immigration judge.

    An alien’s fear is considered “credible” if it shows a “significant possibility” that he will be able to establish eligibility for asylum or for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture.

    The persecution has to be on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Otherwise, it will not make the alien eligible for asylum, no matter how serious it might be.

    If the asylum officer rejects the alien’s claim, he can request an administrative review of the officer’s determination, which will be performed by an immigration judge. If the immigration judge rejects the alien’s claim too, he is deported without further proceedings.

    Why it is necessary to expand the use of expedited removal proceedings.

    President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement program is failing because of an immigration court backlog crisis. If he doesn’t eliminate that backlog soon, the population of undocumented aliens will be substantially larger when he leaves office than it was when he began his presidency.

    Read more at http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-en...hard-times-are

    Published originally on The Hill.

    Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years. He subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years.










  2. When immigration judges get political, justice suffers. By Nolan Rappaport


    © Getty

    "Refugee Roulette"

    President Barack Obama’s immigration policies had the unintended consequence of encouraging illegal immigration. By focusing enforcement efforts primarily on aliens who had been convicted of serious crimes or who had been caught near the border after making an illegal entry, he created what I call a “home free magnet.”

    Aliens wanting to enter the United States illegally knew that they would be safe from deportation once they had reached the interior of the country unless they were convicted of a serious crime. This was a powerful incentive to do whatever was necessary to enter the United States.

    President Donald Trump destroyed this magnet with tough campaign rhetoric and his executive order, Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, which greatly expanded enforcement priorities. No deportable alien is safe under Trump’s enforcement policies.

    But previous administrations have left Trump with another enforcement problem that he has not resolved yet.

    The immigration judges who decide whether an alien in removal proceedings will be deported have been selected by successive administrations with varying views on immigration enforcement, which has produced an immigration court of 350 judges who have conflicting views on how immigration law should be applied.
    According to a Reuters analysis of thousands of immigration court decisions, whether an alien in removal proceedings is allowed to remain or is deported depends largely on which immigration judge hears his case and where the hearing is held.

    Read more at http://thehill.com/opinion/immigrati...ustice-suffers

    Published originally on The Hill.

    About the author. Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years.





Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: