When an immigrant first steps foot in the United States, it can be a frightening experience. However, coming to the U.S. may have seemed pretty easy compared to the circumstances an immigrant was facing in his or her homeland. Whatever the reason you have come to Colorado, you likely did so in hopes of finding new opportunities and a better life. However, this can only be accomplished if lawful status protects you from being removed.
If you came here expecting to seek asylum,
To many, the United States is known as the land of opportunity. When an immigrant first comes to the U.S., he or she may have come on a visa to take advantage of the many opportunities available. However, over time, he or she may decide that the U.S. has come to feel like home and want to make it own officially and permanently.
If that is the case, it is time for that immigrant to consider obtaining citizenship.
On Saturday, September 22, 2018, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a proposed rule that, if implemented, will change how U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officers determine whether someone is eligible for adjustment of status and, in some cases, extension of stay and change of status within the United States. The changes would also apply to certain lawful permanent residents seeking to reenter the country after a period of travel abroad, such as those who have committed certain crimes and those who have been abroad for more than 6 months.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions placed yet another restriction on immigration judges, limiting when they can terminate cases in removal proceedings.
Sessions held that immigration judges are only allowed to terminate or dismiss, immigration court cases under “specific and circumscribed” conditions. These “specific” conditions include, for instance, times when the Department of Homeland Security cannot prove its case, or when the case involved “exceptionally appealing or humanitarian factors.”
Typically, when an immigration judge terminates removal proceedings against an individual,
Another change in policy and another reason to hire an immigration lawyer (or be glad you already did)!
For as long as I have been in Immigration law firms I’ve been asked the question, “But why should I hire an immigration lawyer?” The answer is never simple but neither is the processing in U.S. immigration. As with a lot of things, there are personal, factual, and other variations and reasons why it would be worthwhile to have an experienced attorney assisting you in the navigation of the U.S.
With government crackdowns on immigrants, both undocumented and legal, dominating headlines, the fact that many immigrants are still successfully navigating the labyrinth can get lost in the shuffle. The USCIS announcement that over 45,000 people were sworn in as newly naturalized U.S. citizens as part of Constitution and Citizenship Day celebrations serves as a reminder that many noncitizens continue to win their cases.
The celebrations included over 260 naturalization ceremonies across the country,
Thousands of people across the country have been given charging documents (“NTA”) to appear in Immigration Court by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). But their official notices to appear were greeted by court staffers who called them “fake dates.” The immigration removal process in Immigration Court does not begin until the government (ICE) files the charging document (NTA) with the Court. Employees at Immigration Courts across the country are reporting that people are showing up on the date and time listed on the NTA.
Are you a Student (F), Vocational Student (M) or Exchange Visitor (J) Principal or Family Member Nonimmigrant Visa Holder? What does the new USCIS Unlawful Presence Guidance Mean to YOU?
With the creation of USCIS, many of the predecessor agency’s (INS) policies and procedures were maintained and continued. Beginning in 1997, an INS policy found that individuals admitted to the United States in student (F nonimmigrant), exchange visitor (J nonimmigrant), or vocational student (M nonimmigrant) statuses for “duration of status” began accruing unlawful presence only after INS found a violation of nonimmigrant status or when the individual was ordered excluded,
The Trump administration’s efforts to remove certain immigrants from the U.S. are being fought in two separate federal lawsuits: one challenging the termination of Temporary Protected Status for certain countries and one challenging the arrest of immigrants at their green card interviews. The Trump administration has attempted to end both lawsuits by asking the respective judges to dismiss them, and both judges have refused to do so, allowing the lawsuits to move forward.
The Trump administration has gradually ended Temporary Protected Status—or,
The Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) recently reassigned a high profile case to an out-of-town immigration judge handpicked by EOIR headquarters. The reason it took the case away from one judge and gave it to another was because the original judge hadn’t issued a removal order as quickly as the administration had wanted. In response, the National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ) filed a grievance against EOIR on August 8, 2018.
How did we do?
Note: Your review may be shared publicly.