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

Immigration Daily

 




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. What Trump's 'expedited removal' really means for immigrants in the US. By Nolan Rappaport




    © Getty

    Knowing that an alien in the United States who is charged with being deportable has a statutory right to a hearing before an immigration judge and that there is a backlog crisis in our immigration courts, I predictedthat President Donald Trump would not be able to deport millions of undocumented immigrants.

    Since then, the backlog has gotten even higher. As of the end of January 2017, it was 542,411 cases and the average wait time for a hearing was almost 700 days.

    Even if the immigration judges did not receive any additional cases, it would take them more than two-and-a-half years to catch up.




    But President Trump has finessed his way around this problem by implementing a little-known expedited removal provision in his executive order (EO), “Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements.” The provision is section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(II) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

    Read more at --
    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...-immigrants-in

    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 the 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. He also has been a policy advisor for the DHS Office of Information Sharing and Collaboration under a contract with TKC Communications, and he has been in private practice as an immigration lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson.




    Updated 02-24-2017 at 05:41 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  2. Trump's Deportation Nation: Man Commits Suicide After Deportation; ICE Drags Woman With Brain Tumor From Hospital Bed Back to Detention. Roger Algase

    The following has been revised and expanded as of February 24 at 8:00 am:

    More chilling news reports are coming in about the fear, panic and despair among Latino immigrants throughout America being caused by Donald Trump's stepped-up deportations. These reports make the comparison with the expulsions and other persecution of Jews in 1930's Germany seem much less far fetched than one would like to think. (See my blog comment in the February 23 Immigration Daily.)

    In one report, a Mexican man who was being deported to one of the most dangerous, drug cartel infested areas, committed suicide right after arrival at the Mexican side of the border, in a grim reminder of the Polish Jews who did the same thing after being sent back to Poland from Nazi Germany in 1938 (as mentioned in an article which I quoted from on February 23).

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-39049670

    According to another horrifying story which one would think more typical of North Korea than the United States of America, a Salvadorean woman with a who has a pending appeal from denial of her application for political asylum, and who was awaiting surgery for a brain tumor, was tied up and dragged off her hospital bed by immigration agents and taken back to the detention center where she was being held.

    http://time.com/4680418/immigration-brain-tumor-woman/

    Another story reports that ICE refused to permit either lawyers or her family to see her while she was in the hospital.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ain-tumor.html

    In a third incident, which shows how fragile the rights of US citizens are also in a period of government repression against immigrants, CBP agents stationed themselves that the exit to a domestic flight landing in New York from San Francisco to check the documents of every passenger who was getting off the plane, US and foreign citizen alike.

    Allegedly, CBP was only looking for one particular passenger on the flight who was subject to a final deportation order (and was not actually on the plane). But one wonders what would have happened to any American citizen on the plane who did not happen to have a US passport or birth certificate in his or her possession. One also wonders what might have happened to any foreign citizen travelling with proper ID but without proof of current legal status in the US.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-fugitive.html

    One is again reminded of a well known government agency in 1930's Germany which was also very good at doing random document searches and taking people without the right papers into custody (from which many never returned). This agency was known in German as the Geheime Statspolizei, or "Secret State Police" in English.

    Meanwhile, schools across America are trying to deal with fears among children o being deported, and some are taking steps to bar ICE agents who do not have warrants from entering the schools. See, Washington Post December 26, 2016:

    Schools warn of increased student fears due to immigrant arrests, Trump election

    (Sorry, I do not have a link - please go to Google for access.)

    See also:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...forcement.html

    One point is clear: the worst fears of those who warned during the presidential campaign that Trump's election could lead to mass deportation of up to 11 million men, women and children in America, but who were not always taken seriously by the media or the public, are now becoming reality. See an August, 2016 article by Chicago attorney and former AILA president David Leopold entitled:

    The shocking reality of Trump's plan to deport millions

    (Sorry, I do not have a link, please go to Google to access this article too.)

    In a grim warning about how dangerous Trump's mass deportation could be to the rights of American citizens and the foundations of our democracy itself, Leopold writes the following in his article:

    "Would our citizens be coerced into becoming immigration informants? Would Americans rat on their neighbors, friends or relatives out of a misguided feeling of patriotism, or, perhaps worse, vengeance and retribution?"

    Leopold might also have added that American citizens, too, may in the not too far distant future feel pressure by the government to report unauthorized immigrants under fear of criminal prosecution for not doing so under INA Section 274, which makes it a federal felony to "harbor" or "assist" anyone staying in the United States without legal permission.

    In Donald Trump's America, we may be hearing much more about this up to now infrequently used statute, which I will be writing about in more detail in a forthcoming comment.

    Forcing American citizens to report and turn in immigrants, if this takes place, as it easily could as part of Trump's mass deportation agenda, would also bring up chilling memories of what happened to German citizens who tried to protect Jews in their country between 1933 and 1945.
    _____________________________
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, he has been representing mainly skilled and professional immigrants in work visa and green card cases.

    Roger's email address is algaselex@gmail.com

    Updated 02-24-2017 at 05:14 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  3. Trump's Plan to Send Asylum Seekers to Mexico Recalls Dark Time When Germany Sent Jews Back to Poland. Roger Algase

    Whatever one wants to say about Donald Trump's latest two deportation and interior enforcement memos, including his plan to send asylum seekers from all countries, not just Mexico (ostensibly to wait in that country for US asylum hearings), one has to acknowledge that his plan is not without historical precedent.

    (For a link to the memos, see the propublica.org article immidiately below.)

    An article in propublica.org describes Trump's plan as follows:

    https://www.propublica.org/article/t...of-nationality

    "If present immigration trends continue, that could mean the United States would push hundreds of thousands of Guatemalans, Hondurans, Salvadorans, Brazilians, Ecuadorans, even Haitians into Mexico. Currently, such people are detained in the US and allowed to request asylum...

    'This would say if you want to make a claim for asylum or whatever we'll hear your case but you are going to wait in Mexico,' a DHS official said."

    How willing would Mexico be to accept all these non-Mexican asylum seekers? The above article continues:

    "However, former senior Mexican and American immigration officials said it would very well create new security problems along the border, as authorities in each country push unwanted migrants back and forth...

    Mexico is as likely to embrace the plan as it did the notion of paying for a wall. 'I would expect Mexico to respond with an emphatic "No," ' said Gustavo Mohar, a former senior Mexican immigration and national security policy official."

    The above reference to pushing unwanted immigrants back and forth, recalls chilling memories of another group of unwanted people, Polish Jews, who were shunted back and forth between Germany and Poland during early stages of the Holocaust. A website based in the Czech Republic describes these events as follows:

    http://www.holocaust.cz/en/history/e...-from-germany/

    After Poland cancelled the passports of all Polish Jews living in Germany and Austria because it didn't want them to return to Poland, and after talks between Germany and Poland failed,


    "...the German foreign ministry handed the whole affair over to the Gestapo. which on 27 October 1938 started forcibly deporting Polish Jews over the border. In some places only the men were deported, since the Nazis expected that they would be joined by their wives and children all the same, while in other places women and children were deported as well.

    How about that for an example of "family reunification"? The article continues:

    "Those arrested included old people, some of whom died during deportation. There were also suicides. The arrested Jews were compelled, through threats and violence, to illegally cross the border with Poland. In all, approximately 17,000 people were expelled in this way."

    And what was Poland's reaction? The article continues

    "However, the Polish authorities refused to accept them, and so most had to live in for many long weeks in no man's land, or the Polish border area.".

    The article goes on to describe how thousands of the deported Jews were forced to live in a Polish refugee camp before it was later disbanded and the Jews were finally allowed to reside in Poland. The article also states that the Nazis, after talks with the Polish authorities, also allowed a small group of Jewish men to return to Germany temporarily so that they could put their affairs in order.

    Trump's administration might be more generous. A very few of the asylum seekers who can meet the stricter standards which Trump is also planning to impose may actually granted asylum by Trump's adjudicators or immigration court judges and allowed to return to live in the US. No one should expect the numbers of successful applications to be very large.

    Trump, also, expects his administration to hold discussions with Mexico about his planned expulsion of Central American and South American immigrant to that country (just as Germany held discussions with Poland about the Jews) even though, according to USA Today (February 22) Mexico is vigorously resisting Trump's plan and is threatening to go to the United Nations to oppose it.

    See: USA Today:

    Mexico says no to Trump's new deportation rules

    (I do not have a link - please go to Google to access this story.)

    Is Germany's deportation of Polish Jews about to become the model for Trump's plans for hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers in America?
    --------------------------------------
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain work visas and green cards. Roger's email address is algaselex@gmail.com





    Updated 02-23-2017 at 05:25 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  4. Trump's next immigration challenge may be beyond the northern border. By Nolan Rappaport


    © Getty

    According to the UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, the United States has an exceptional history of welcoming refugees.

    Since 1975, it has welcomed more than three million refugees for resettlement from all over the world. Nevertheless, despite the efforts of the United States and 29 other countries that accept refugees for resettlement, less than one percent of the world’s 21.3 million refugees are resettled.

    The United States conducts its own vetting process to decide which refugees it will accept, and this is in addition to the screening UNHCR does on the refugees. The entire process is conducted abroad. It can take up to two years to complete, but the processing time has been severely reduced on at least one occasion.

    The United States reduced the processing time to three months last year to meet President Barack Obama’s goal of resettling 10,000 Syrian refugees here by September 30.
    And the value of security screening depends on the availability of information from a refugee’s country.

    The threat of terrorism has caused many people to become suspicious of the refugees. In the minds of many Europeans, for instance, the current refugee crisis and the terrorism in the European Union are very much related to one another.

    Read more at --
    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...orthern-border

    Published initially 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 the 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. He also has been a policy advisor for the DHS Office of Information Sharing and Collaboration under a contract with TKC Communications, and he has been in private practice as an immigration lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson.




  5. Trump's Latest Muslim Ban, Immigrant Raids and Mass Deportation Policies Put America's Democracy in Danger. Roger Algase

    Update, February 21, as of 1:20 pm:

    The Washington Post reports on February 21 that the DHS is trying to prevent "panic" in immigrant communities over its strict new enforcement guidelines signed by DHS Secretary John Kelly over the weekend. In a story entitled:

    Trump administration seeks to prevent "panic" over new immigration enforcement policies

    (I do not have a link - please go to Google to access the full story.)

    a DHS official is quoted as saying:

    "We do not need a sense of panic in the communities...

    We do not have the personnel, time or resources to go into communities and round up people and do all kinds of mass throwing folks on buses...This is not intended to produce mass roundups, mass deportations."

    People in immigrant communities will, no doubt, be greatly comforted to know that the DHS doesn't want anyone to panic at the new policies, which could make it easier to deport most, if not all, of the estimated 11 million unauthorized immigrants now in the US.

    It is easy to understand why the DHS doesn't want anyone to panic. That way, when ICE comes for them, up to 11 million immigrants will go quietly.

    My original revised comment follows:

    The following comment has been revised and rewritten as of February 20 at 8:57 am, with a few additional corrections as of 1:30 pm on February 20.

    In the latest development in the controversy over the president's January 27 Muslim ban order, which, in Orwellian fashion, the White House insists is not specifically directed against Muslims, even though an estimated 99 percent of the people in the seven countries affected by the order belong to that religion, the AP and the Washington Post both report that Donald Trump is planning to "replace" his original seven Muslim country travel ban order with a new order which would contain the same ban on entry against the almost 200 million citizens of the seven countries, close to 99 percent of whom just happen to be Muslims, but with a few minor, essentially cosmetic, tweaks.

    http://www.kentucky.com/news/busines...133767709.html

    The first tweak, according the AP and WP reports, is that the new ban would not apply to US permanent residents who are citizens of the seven countries. However, this is a meaningless change.

    After the initial chaos, confusion, fear and anxiety caused by lack of clarity from the White House over whether the original January 25 executive order applied to green card holders or not, the White House had already issued a "clarification" (reportedly over the objections of Senior Advisor Stephen Bannon, who is widely considered to be one of the main instigators of the entry ban order in the first place) stating that US permanent residents from the seven countries were exempt from the ban.

    In its briefs filed with the 9th Circuit, the DOJ also took the position that the ban did not apply to green card holders from the seven countries. Therefore this first reported tweak would be no real change at all. See also:

    http://www.pressherald.com/2017/02/1...ted-this-week/

    Another tweak reported by the AP and the WP is that citizens of the seven banned countries who have already been granted visas, or who are already in transit to the US with visas (which one is not clear) will be allowed to enter the US.

    Dual citizens of the affected countries may also be exempt from the revised ban. However, these changes will, at most, affect only a very small percentage of the nearly 200 million citizens of the above countries who are still being being barred from the US solely because of their religion.

    (I will not dwell on the absurd argument that the above ban is not really a Muslim ban because there is a tiny handful of non-Muslims also affected by the ban. If there has been any presidential finding, or rational basis for such a finding, that the 1 per cent or less of citizens of these countries who are Jews or Christians pose a danger to the US, I have not seen it.

    The ban is clearly not directed against non-Muslims, even if a very few may turn out to be "collateral damage" by being denied visas also.)

    Therefore, the basic authoritarian premise of the Muslim ban, that one man, the president, accountable to no one but himself (as the DOJ has claimed in its 9th Circuit briefs) has unlimited power to ban as many people as he wants for any reason he sees fit, remains in place.

    As The Guardian reports:

    "The goal of the new [Muslim entry ban] order is to bolster a signature initiative against ongoing legal and constitutional scrutiny, rather than revise it in a substantive fashion, relax its restrictions or consider any deleterious consequences it has on national security, according to Guardian sources."

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ional-security

    When this attempt to use authoritarian power is looked at in the context of the increased police state measures that the Trump administration is putting into effect to move toward increased mass arrests and deportations, in addition to the fear and panic in immigrant communities throughout America caused by stepped up ICE raids against unauthorized immigrants with no criminal records which took place last week, the danger to our democratic institutions becomes even greater. See:

    http://fortune.com/2017/02/11/immigr...aids-us-cities

    See also:

    Washington Post, February 18:

    Memos signed by DHS secretary describe sweeping new guidelines for deporting illegal immigrants

    I will discuss the details of these police atate measures, and the equal protection and due process issues they raise, in an upcoming comment.(Go to Google for a link to the above WP report.)

    But while the Muslim ban clearly raises serious questions concerning the extent, if any, to which our laws and Constitution permit unfettered one-man control over our immigration system, or a major part of it, under the Plenary Power doctrine and INA Section 212(f) - which I will discuss in the light of the 9th Circuit's February 9 TRO decision in a forthcoming post - there is an even greater danger to our democracy that goes beyond the four corners of the Muslim ban executive order itself.

    This danger arises from the way that the president has tried to delegitimize opposition to the Muslim ban order by the courts and the media, by claiming that anyone who opposes the ban is in effect supporting terrorists and will bear responsibility for any future attack that might take place in America. See:

    http://www.alternet.org/human-rights...ard-terrifying

    As the above salon.com/alternet.org article states, Trump's attacks on the courts in connection with the Muslim ban order:

    "...should utterly horrify every champion of democracy, whether on the left or right end of the political spectrum."

    In addition, Trump's attacks against a free press as an "enemy of the people" for opposing his immigration policies recall the language of two of history's worst tyrants, Stalin and Mao.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39015559

    When Trump's Muslim ban order is looked in the larger context of his police state actions against up to 11 million immigrants who are in the US without legal status, and his attempts to crush the independence of the courts and the media, just as another popularly elected leader did in Germany 8 decades ago, it becomes clear that it is not only not only the rights of Muslim immigrants (such as they are) and of American citizens who wish to sponsor and invite Muslim immigrants to come to this country, that are affected.

    Trump's immigration executive orders and actions, including not only the Muslim and refugee bans, but his nationwide immigration raids and related activities in the direction of mass deportation of up to 11 million immigrants, are a dangerous movement toward one-man rule in America and the end of our democracy.
    _______________________________
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, Roger has been helping mainly skiilled and professional immigrants obtain work visas and green cards.

    Roger believes that any attempt to bar immigrants from the US, or to single them out for deportation, based on discrimination because of race, religion or national origin, or to exercise authoritarian, one man control over our immigration system, endangers the rights of every American, and puts the foundations of our democracy at risk.

    Roger's email address is algaselex@gmail.com


    Updated 02-21-2017 at 03:05 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

Page 1 of 225 1231151101 ... LastLast
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: