Menu
Search

Withholding of Removal

HomePractice AreasVulnerable PopulationsWithholding of Removal

Withholding of Removal

Differences Between Asylum and Withholding of Removal

The law prohibits the removal of anyone to a country where his or her life or freedom would be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, political opinions or membership in a social group.

There are several key differences between asylum and withholding of removal. First, withholding of removal is nondiscretionary. If an individual demonstrates qualification for withholding, it must be granted. Second, the standard for obtaining withholding is that it is “more likely than not” that the individual will face persecution if removed. This is defined as a 51% chance of persecution. Thus, the standard is much higher than the “reasonable possibility” standard required in asylum cases. Third, the bars to withholding are narrower than the bars to asylum. The bars include:

  • An applicant who has persecuted others;
  • An applicant who is a danger to the community after having been convicted of a particularly serious crime including an aggravated felony for which a sentence of five years or more was imposed;
  • An applicant who has committed a serious non-political crime outside of the U.S.;
  • An applicant whom the Attorney General has reasonable grounds to believe is a danger to the security of the U.S.;
  • An applicant who has engaged in terrorist activity.

A person granted withholding of removal is not granted protection from removal to a third country. Furthermore, a grant of withholding of removal does not result in permanent resident status or the ability to apply for permanent resident status. Although, an individual granted withholding of removal may receive work authorization.

NOTABLE CASES

Appeals & Federal Litigation Cases

PURDUE UNIVERSITY v. EUGENE SCALIA

We’ve filed a case challenging the US Department of Labor over a new rule that dramatically hikes wages for H-1B, H-1B1, PERM and E-3 cases.

VIEW CASE

AKER v. TRUMP

This case challenged the Presidential Proclamation 10014 and 10052 with respect to DV winners. The judge has certified the case as a class action …

VIEW CASE

ANUNCIATO v. TRUMP

This case challenged visa processing delays and the Trump Administration’s immigrant visa ban, Presidential Proclamation 10014.

VIEW CASE

MILLIGAN v. POMPEO

This case features “pair[s] of star-crossed lovers” on whose lives, like Romeo and Juliet’s, a plague has wreaked havoc.

VIEW CASE

OUR AWARDS & ACHIEVEMENTS

We Are Committed to Your Dreams.

Countless people dream of becoming a U.S. citizen. If your application was rejected by the USCIS, we are here to fight for your best interests.

Get in touch with us. Write us a message.

×
Tap Here To Schedule An Appointment
It's Fast & Easy
Call Now Button